The evolution of blond hair and blue eyes among Nordics
Peter Frost has written a cool paper on the evolution of blond hair and the origin of the remarkable diversity of eye and hair color in Northern and Eastern Europeans. His paper will be published in the upcoming March edition of the journal Evolution and Human Behavior. Frost is spot-on in nailing intense sexual selection as the primary reason for the high prevalence of blondness, which is of recent origin (less than 20,000 years old), and the unusual diversity of hair and eye color among Northern and Eastern Europeans. Whereas Frost’s proposed reason for the intense sexual selection is open to debate, the conclusion that intense sexual selection is implicated is almost certain. I am including his paper in this post, but will first mention some important implications.
Frost also proposes that the extreme depigmentation seen among Nordics is partly related to sexual selection. Frost mentions traits other than pigmentation that suggest strong sexual selection among Nordics, namely the more feminine looks of white women, on average, than women in non-white populations. I would like to add a high prevalence of fine facial features, too, and certain parts of the face that bear the signature of sexual selection, such as the jaw, whereby the chin is better developed than in non-Nordics, even though all other parts of the jaw have shrunk significantly.
For rapid changes to occur under intense sexual selection, two conditions should be met. Firstly, there has to be a high level of sexual freedom, especially afforded to women, and secondly, there also has to be a high level of variability with respect to reproductive success in the population, with individuals having less aesthetically desirable traits (ancestral traits) being disproportionately likely to die without reproducing. Among human populations, it is very clear that the availability of sexual freedom, especially to women, is much higher in Northern Europe than in most other societies, and it has been this way for a long time, except for a short period when the Church was powerful in Northern Europe. In many human societies, young individuals are not allowed to date, marriages are arranged and fornication or adultery are met with drastic consequences. Therefore, once again, such cultural differences are consistent with Frost’s hypothesis of more intense recent (on the order of tens of thousands of years at most) sexual selection in Nordics than in other populations.
People in many non-European societies, such as in Middle Eastern and South Asian societies, pride themselves on their alleged superior morality regarding sexual behavior, failing to realize that moral superiority can only be claimed if their sexual behavior remains the same when they have the same opportunity for sexual impropriety as in the West, which is surely not the case. Arabs and South Asians can sing paeans to their “superior sexual morality” all they want; the consequences of the low level of sexual freedom and arranged marriages in their cultures are very clear: the unattractive among them, thanks to not having to find mates on their own, are more likely to reproduce than unattractive whites; thereby, these populations have been evolving in attractiveness less slowly than whites. One will find few whites who would disagree that non-Europeans in general, including non-European Caucasoid types, look far less attractive than whites, on average, but also, few non-European Caucasoid types would disagree with the statement, too. I know for a fact that Razib Khan of Gene Expression blog thinks that white women, especially blondes, are much superior in looks to Bangladeshi women.
This ties in to mass migration of non-whites into the West. If there are sufficient non-whites around, unattractive whites, who would until the recent past disproportionately die without being able to find a mate and reproduce, may end up with a non-white person who would be more than happy to get a white mate. For instance, a black man would typically prefer a 250-pound white woman to a 350-pound black woman. The resulting offspring of such unions, being closer to whites in looks, would be more acceptable as a mate to a greater proportion of whites than the non-white parent, which in turn will set the stage for gradual creeping of non-white genetics into the white gene pool, resulting in reduced attractiveness of the descendents of modern whites. In addition, if mass migration of the likes of Muslims reduces sexual freedom in the West, then the mulatto descendents of present-day Europeans will also have less of an opportunity to reacquire the looks of their white forebears via intense sexual selection. The conclusions are clear...we have yet more reasons to keep the non-white masses out of the West, even if they are as intelligent and as well-behaved as whites are. Personally, I don’t have a problem with a small non-white presence in the West, but allowing mass migration of non-whites to the West is madness.
Peter Frost’s paper cites some genetic data to support greater reproductive skew among white males than non-white males, which is consistent with more intense sexual selection among Europeans in recent history. In this regard, I would like to add the following three papers that, taken together, show similar evidence:
Pereira, L., Dupanloup, I., Rosser, Z. H., Jobling, M. A., & Barbujani, G. (2001). Y-chromosome mismatch distributions in Europe. Mol Biol Evol, 18(7), 1259-1271.
Pritchard, J. K., Seielstad, M. T., Perez-Lezaun, A., & Feldman, M. W. (1999). Population growth of human Y chromosomes: a study of Y chromosome microsatellites. Mol Biol Evol, 16(12), 1791-1798.
Shen, P., Wang, F., Underhill, P. A., Franco, C., Yang, W. H., Roxas, A., et al. (2000). Population genetic implications from sequence variation in four Y chromosome genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 97(13), 7354-7359.
Also consider the following pictures, starting from Miss India 2005, Amrita Thapar, who has a manly face.
Compare Miss India 2005 to Miss USA 2005, Chelsea Cooley, below.
Look at the top three contestants in the Miss India 2005 beauty pageant.
Now look at the top-ranked contestants in the Miss USA 2005 beauty pageant; shown clockwise from top left: Brittany Hogan, Kristen Johnson, Melissa Witek and Jill Gulseth.
It is unlikely that beauty pageants in India have to deal with political correctness to the extent that is seen in the U.S.A. Therefore, the “beauties” shown below -- from the 2005 Miss India beauty pageant -- are probably among the better looking Hindu women.
Note that Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid and Australoid elements are easily discernible in the women shown above. If race mixing is supposed to increase physical attractiveness, I for sure do not want my female descendents to look as “attractive” as the women above and would prefer the “less attractive” white look.
Hindu’s select their actresses for a high level of attractiveness. Look at the three Hindu actresses below; from top to bottom: Shilpa Shetty, Madhuri Dixit and Preity Zinta.
Compare the Hindu actresses to the three Nordic women below; from top to bottom: Ragnhild Marie Alvær, Sharon van der Knaap and Jennifer Avalon.
It may be claimed that I have deliberately picked unattractive Hindu women for comparative purposes, but a quick look at the photos of the untouchables of India suffices to convince that the Hindu women shown above are among the better looking ones in India.
Of course, there are even better looking Hindus as shown below, but guess who they owe their good looks to? Shown clockwise from top: Aditi Govitrikar, Hritik Roshan and Arun Nair.
Finally, look at the physique of the woman that many Hindus consider to be the most beautiful woman in the world, Aishwarya Rai, who has broad shoulders and a wide waist, and compare her physique to that of the white woman shown below her, the likes of which are so many in number that the entire disk space allotted to this site could be easily filled with their pictures.
Hindus and especially Muslims can keep their “morally superior” sexuality to themselves. If more intense sexual selection -- having the side effect of greater allowability of sexual debauchery -- produces the likes of white women, I’d prefer it any day to a system that is far less successful at naturally getting rid of elements of the looks of primitive man. Black Africans would appear to have been in a position to improve their looks, too, given their high rates of promiscuity, but like their abysmally low IQ, they do not seem to have evolved a better aesthetic sense, and retain some of the most primitive facial features around.
Peter Frost’s paper follows.
European hair and eye color: A case of frequency-dependent sexual selection?
Peter Frost
Abstract
Human hair and eye color is unusually diverse in northern and eastern Europe. The many alleles involved (at least seven for hair color) and their independent origin over a short span of evolutionary time indicate some kind of selection. Sexual selection is particularly indicated because it is known to favor color traits and color polymorphisms. In addition, hair and eye color is most diverse in what used to be, when first peopled by hunter-gatherers, a unique ecozone of low-latitude continental tundra. This type of environment skews the operational sex ratio (OSR) of hunter-gatherers toward a male shortage in two ways: (1) men have to hunt highly mobile and spatially concentrated herbivores over longer distances, with no alternate food sources in case of failure, the result being more deaths among young men; (2) women have fewer opportunities for food gathering and thus require more male provisioning, the result being less polygyny. These two factors combine to leave more women than men unmated at any one time. Such an OSR imbalance would have increased the pressures of sexual selection on early European women, one possible outcome being an unusual complex of color traits: hair- and eye-color diversity and, possibly, extreme skin depigmentation.
Keywords: Gender roles; Monogamy; Pigmentation; Polygyny; Sexual selection; Upper Paleolithic.
1. Introduction
Human hair and eye color is unusually diverse in a geographic area centered on the East Baltic and covering northern and eastern Europe (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2). Within this area, eyes are not only brown but also blue, gray, hazel, or green, while hair is not only black but also brown, flaxen, golden, or red (Beals & Hoijer, 1965, pp. 212–214). As one moves outward from this area, color diversity declines markedly with eyes becoming uniformly brown and hair uniformly black.
Fig. 1. Hair-color diversity in and near Europe (after Beals & Hoijer, 1965, p. 214). (Reprinted with permission from Beals et al., “An Introduction to Anthropology,” 3rd ed. Published by Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA. Copyright © 1965 by Pearson Education.)
Fig. 2. Eye-color diversity in and near Europe (after Beals & Hoijer, 1965, p. 213). (Reprinted with permission from Beals et al., “An Introduction to Anthropology,” 3rd ed. Published by Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA. Copyright © 1965 by Pearson Education.)
Is this diversity due to chance? In particular, could it reflect founder effects during the repeopling of glaciated Europe 15,000 to 10,000 years ago? When a founder group breaks off from its parent population, such “sampling” may indeed increase the frequency of a variant hair- or eye-color allele. It is less probable that two alleles of the same gene would become more frequent, and this probability would decline exponentially with each additional allele. Yet the hair-color gene, MC1R, has at least seven phenotypically distinct alleles that exist only in Europe (Box et al., 1997, Harding et al., 2000 and Rana et al., 1999). Furthermore, eye-color diversity results from another set of alleles at a locus that is at best weakly linked to hair color (Eiberg & Mohr, 1987).
Is this diversity due to relaxation of selection and a resulting accumulation of variant alleles? Harding et al. (2000) have investigated this evolutionary scenario and found that the time to the most recent common ancestral hair color would be about a million years, with the redhead alleles alone being approximately 80,000 years old. Templeton (2002) has come to a similar conclusion: If the cause were relaxation of selection, the current level of hair-color diversity would have taken 850,000 years to develop. Yet modern humans have been in Europe for approximately 35,000 years.
Is this diversity due to admixture with older European populations, notably the Neanderthals? Recently, human mtDNA has been retrieved from skeletal material on both sides of the transition from Neanderthals to modern humans: No genetic continuity is discernible between the late Neanderthals and the early modern Europeans (Caramelli et al., 2003). In addition, the mtDNA and dental traits of Neanderthals are no more similar to those of present-day Europeans than they are to those of any other modern human population (Krings et al., 1999, Ovchinnikov et al., 2000 and Tyrrell & Chamberlain, 1998). Neanderthal admixture seems to have been minor, if not negligible, and could hardly account for the high proportion of Europeans who deviate from the species norm of black hair and brown eyes.
Is this diversity due, then, to some selective force, either natural or sexual selection? The first kind of selection is unlikely. As a rule, highly visible color traits are not adaptations to the natural environment, which typically favors an unobtrusive, cryptic coloration as a means to evade predators. It has been suggested that a lighter colored iris may offer more visual acuity in dim light, such as in the misty maritime environments of northwestern Europe (Short, 1975). Eye color, however, is polymorphic over a much larger area of Europe, most of which is typically continental in climate. It is also unclear why selection for visual acuity would have favored more variability in eye color as opposed to a simple reduction in eye pigment.
The alternative, sexual selection, has already been advanced to explain Europe's hair- and eye-color diversity (Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994, p. 266). This kind of selection is known to favor colorful traits, but there is little consensus on the reasons why. It may be that bright colors stimulate sexual attraction in the brain through (1) mate-assessment algorithms that interpret pigment production as a sign of health and, hence, mate quality; (2) sex-recognition algorithms that pick out sex-specific color stimuli and respond open-endedly with stronger responses to more intense colors; and (3) general monitoring algorithms that respond to highly visible stimuli and indirectly alert other systems, including those related to sexual attraction (Farr, 1980, Hamilton & Zuk, 1982, Kirkpatrick, 1987 and Manning, 1979, pp. 66–75). The opposite sex may exploit all three algorithm types by intensifying its color stimuli until functional constraints intervene or until the cost of easier detection by predators exceeds the benefit of stronger sexual attraction (Endler, 1980 and Endler, 1991).
Under certain conditions, sexual selection may also diversify color traits within a single population. When an individual is faced with potential mates of equal value, it will tend to select the one that “stands out from the crowd,” that is, that has the rarest color morph. The selection is frequency-dependent, declining in strength as the rare morph becomes more common and tending toward an equilibrium that maximizes color diversity. This rare-color advantage has been studied mainly in fruit flies and guppies but has also been reported in a parasitic wasp, in red flour beetles, in ladybugs, and in leafroller moths (Anderson, 1969, Brooks, 2002, Farr, 1980, Grant et al., 1974, Hughes et al., 1999, Muggleton, 1979, Simchuk, 2001 and Sinnock, 1970). There are also a number of bird species that exhibit color polymorphisms for which the mode of selection remains unclear (Lank, 2002). Whatever the cause, color polymorphisms are relatively uncommon. They are often hindered by two evolutionary constraints: (1) high predation pressure, this being a constraint on color traits in general and (2) the presence of related species within the same geographic range, apparently because too much intraspecific variability interferes with species recognition and leads to hybridization (Endler, 1980).
Many evolutionary biologists dislike the concept of rare-color advantage. There is no gain in fitness from sexual attraction to unusual colors; therefore natural selection should eliminate such nonadaptive behavior. Yet it is difficult to see how, just as it is difficult to see how we can counter the many subterfuges that advertisers use to attract our notice. There are good adaptive reasons for paying attention when an eye-catching object enters our field of view, and it is impossible to disable this response in advance for sexual attraction, given that the nature of the object (animate/inanimate, conspecific/nonconspecific, male/female) is determined at a later stage of mental processing. At that stage, the increased attention could be reversed or given a negative meaning. But there would be a cost: not only in additional processing time but also in overcorrection and undercorrection–like a spam-filter that fails to screen out all unwanted e-mails while blocking some legitimate ones. The cost may be justified if attraction to rare-color morphs leads to hybridization or if the color itself is somehow maladaptive. Otherwise, the benefit will not justify the cost.
Rare-color advantage has been reported in humans. Thelen (1983) presented three series of slides showing blonde and brunette females and asked male participants to select the one from each series that they would most prefer to marry. The first series showed 6 brunettes, the second 1 brunette and 5 blondes, and the third 1 brunette and 11 blondes. For the same brunette, preference increased significantly from the first to the third series, that is, in proportion to the rarity of her hair color. The same effect was observed, albeit to a lesser extent, when the study was repeated with male photos and female participants. These findings have some support from other studies. Schweder (1994) found that women tended to change their hair color and hair form to a type that was less common in the general population. Riedl (1990) found that men tended to prefer female faces that diverge from the norm. Finally, Ellis (1928, pp. 182–183) noted less preference for blonde women in England than in France, which he ascribed to the higher prevalence of blondness among the English.
Rare-color advantage may have caused hair and eye color to diversify in ancestral humans, there being neither of the evolutionary constraints mentioned above, that is, high predation pressure or likelihood of hybridization. Outside Africa, there were only two potential predators: wolves and bears, the latter being uncommon and the former only an occasional threat to recent hunter-gatherers (Hoffecker, 2002, pp. 238, 240). Hybridization was just as nonproblematic. All other Homo populations had been reduced to extinction or relic status by 30,000 BP.
It is less clear, though, why hair and eye color diversified in Europe and not elsewhere. Rare-color advantage is a special case of sexual selection, and the intensity of sexual selection normally varies with the operational sex ratio (OSR; the ratio of unmated males to unmated females). The usual pattern is too many males competing for too few females (pregnancy and early infant care exclude some females from mating at any one time). But why would there have been more competition for women in northern and eastern Europe? If anything, there should have been more in sub-Saharan Africa or Papua New Guinea, where a high incidence of polygyny leaves fewer women unmated.
I will argue here that the usual pattern of too many males and too few females was reversed among ancestral Europeans, specifically among the highly mobile groups that once inhabited the continental tundra of ice-age Europe. This environment exposed men to a higher risk of hunting mortality while limiting their ability to provide for more than one wife. With fewer men altogether and even fewer polygynous ones, women had to compete for a limited supply of potential husbands. There was thus sexual selection, but it acted primarily on women—not on men.
2. The Eurasian tundra belt: low-latitude west and high-latitude east
As modern humans spread out of Africa during the Upper Paleolithic, they entered new environments, including one that no longer exists. Loess-steppe covered the plains of northern and eastern Europe during successive ice ages and interglacials until 10,000 years ago (Fig. 3). Quite unlike today's northern barrens, it combined Arctic tundra with fertile loess soil and low latitudes, the Eurasian tundra belt having been pushed far to the south by the Scandinavian icecap. Long intense sunlight favored a lush growth of mosses, lichens, grasses, and low shrubs with grazing herds of mammoths, reindeer, bison, and horses. Despite high bioproductivity, Europe's tundra plains posed several adaptive challenges. Winter temperatures averaged −20 to −30 °C, with little natural protection. Wood for fuel or shelter was scarce. Finally, almost all consumable biomass was in the form of large herds of migrating herbivores (Hoffecker, 2002, pp. 21–26, 32–34).
Fig. 3. Major vegetation zones in Europe approximately 18,000 BP (after Mellars, 1985, p. 275, reprinted with permission from Elsevier).
South of 60°N, the Eurasian tundra belt lay entirely within Europe. East of the Urals, it narrowed and ran further north across Asia and into Beringia. Colder and drier with proportionately less fertile loess, this eastern end had a lower carrying capacity for herbivores (Goebel, 1999 and Hoffecker, 2002, p. 22).
3. Continental Arctic tundra: consequences of human adaptation
3.1. Less food gathering = increased female dependence on male provisioning
In adapting to Arctic tundra, modern humans had to change their sexual division of labor, which normally allocated food gathering to women and hunting to men. Women now processed meat provided by men and did tasks unrelated to food procurement, such as garment making and shelter building. Men procured almost all of the food (Hoffecker, 2002, p. 8).
We can see this task reallocation by comparing recent hunter-gatherers from the Tropics to the Arctic. Near the equator, women procure about half of the family food supply by gathering berries, fruits, roots, grubs, eggs, and other sessile items, these tasks being more compatible than hunting with the demands of pregnancy, breast feeding, and infant transport (Kelly, 1955, pp. 268–269). Away from the equator, the cold season lengthens and gatherable food becomes harder to find, declining from 40% to 55% of the family food supply in hunter-gatherers below 40°N to less than 10% above 60°N (Martin, 1974, pp. 16–18). The end point of this trend is Arctic tundra. Among the Caribou Inuit, female food gathering is limited to eggs (during 2 weeks in summer), raw gadfly larvae, the root of a plant species, and some berries (Birket-Smith, 1929, p. 133).
On this north–south continuum, ice-age European hunter-gatherers were much closer to the ‘Arctic’ end, with most of their food being procured through hunting. Dickson (1990, p. 180) summarizes the evidence: the abundance of game animals in Europe during the late Pleistocene; the volume of animal bone at archeological sites like Solutré, Moldova, Predmosti, and Dolni Vestonice; the large amount of usable meat on late Pleistocene game animals; and the lack of wear on Upper Paleolithic dentition, indicating a grit-free, carnivorous diet (Butzer, 1964, p. 374; Dahlberg & Carbonell, 1961). In addition, biochemical analysis of human remains from a British Upper Paleolithic site reveals a diet high in animal protein, principally from aurochs and red deer (Richards et al., 2000). At Czech, Russian, and British Upper Paleolithic sites, similar analyses reveal a diet high in protein from terrestrial herbivores, waterfowl, and fish (Richards et al., 2001). None of this means that food gathering was absent, only that it was less important. Indeed, a Czech site has yielded evidence of fleshy taproots from charred plant remains (Mason et al., 1994). The remains date, however, to approximately 26,000 BP, when forest-steppe predominated, and the investigators concluded that such foods were limited to southern and central Europe.
3.2. Increased female dependence on male provisioning = constraints on polygyny
As males assume more responsibility for food procurement, polygyny becomes more difficult. In his review of Inuit mating systems, Kjellström (1973, p. 118) concludes, “Since the duty of being a provider was more onerous for the man who had two or more wives, this meant that as a rule it was only the really able and skilful hunters and fishers who could manage this double duty.” Hodge (1959[1905], p. 809) concurs: “monogamy is prevalent, as the support of several wives is possible only for the expert hunter.” This pattern also prevailed among the Chukchi of northeastern Siberia: “The Chukchees commonly live in monogamy; it is only exceptionally that they have two wives” (Nordenskiold, 1882, p. 504). According to the earliest ethnography of the Sami of northern Scandinavia, “Neither is it Lawful for them to Marry more than one Wife at a time, or to be divorced from her. Polygamy and Divorces…, are Things unknown to the Laplanders, both whilst they were Pagans, and since” (Scheffer, 1704, p. 296).
These observations are supported by genetic data. The ratio of Y to X chromosome variability rises markedly as one goes from long-established tropical populations (sub-Saharan Africans, New Guineans, and Aboriginal Australians) to other populations (Europeans, Asians, and Amerindians), indicating that the latter have had a higher proportion of men contributing to the gene pool (Dupanloup et al., 2003; see also Scozzari et al., 1997 and Torroni et al., 1990). More work is needed to determine whether this trend peaks in recent Arctic hunter-gatherers.
3.3. Longer hunting distances = higher death rate among young men
As hunter-gatherers adapt to less tropical environments, men have to cover more terrain while hunting, partly because they need to hunt more (to offset the decline in food gathering) and partly because the game animals themselves roam over a larger territory, the land supporting less vegetation at colder temperatures (Kelly, 1955, pp. 128–132). Hunting distance peaks in the continental Arctic, where almost all potential food is in the form of wide-ranging and highly mobile herds (Hoffecker, 2002, p. 8). It then decreases further north in the extreme Arctic, where hunters cover shorter distances in pursuit of solitary game, fish, and seals (Kelly, 1955, p. 129).
As hunting distance lengthens, more young men die from starvation, accidents, or exposure. Among the Chukchi of the 18th to early 20th centuries, men died young because they followed reindeer over the tundra with a minimum of possessions; in contrast, men lived longer among the Nenets because herd dogs confined the semidomesticated reindeer to nearby pastures (Krupnik, 1985). Arctic populations that still hunted wild game thus had highly skewed sex ratios. Among 19th century Labrador Inuit, only 57 males remained for every 100 females in the 15+ age bracket because of hunting deaths from drowning or exposure (Scheffel, 1984). Among Inuit, in general, “the preponderance of adult women is generally explained by the higher death rate among men due to the natural hazards of hunting” (Weyer, 1932, pp. 135–136).
Some evidence points to long hunting distances and high male mortality on the tundra plains of Upper Paleolithic Europe. Many central Russian sites contain large quantities of black flint from sources at least 130–150 km away and other raw materials from sources up to 650 km away (Hoffecker, 2002, pp. 184–185, 248). Human remains from Upper Paleolithic Europe were once thought to be mainly males (Binford, 1968, Harrold, 1980 and Vallois, 1961), but reanalysis with improved sexing criteria has found that females predominate, suggesting either that many men died under conditions unsuited for burial, such as hunting accidents, or that male burials were less conducive to preservation, such as in aboveground coffins (Mallegni & Fabbri, 1995). The Maszycka Cave in Poland has provided the only ‘snapshot’ of a single extended family from the Upper Paleolithic: the remains of three men, five women, and eight children, all apparently killed and partially eaten (Kozlowski & Sachse-Kozlowska, 1995).
3.4. Constraints on polygyny+higher death rate among young men = skewed OSR
With less polygyny and more young men dying, the OSR is skewed toward a male shortage. Many women lose reproductive time, even among non-Arctic hunter-gatherers with less skewed OSRs. Among the !Kung, about 75% of all women lose some reproductive time while waiting between partners, and 10–20% lose 5 to 15 years. “A relative scarcity of husbands, then, is a regular and expected part of the !Kung marriage system” (Howell, 1979, pp. 247–250). One might expect that this female surplus would encourage more men to take second wives, but “having two families simultaneously is difficult to manage, both economically (in providing for a large number of dependents) and socially (in avoiding the conflicts and irritations of polygamous marriages)” (Howell, 1979, p. 272). Each additional wife, with her offspring, decreases the ratio of food-providing adults to food-consuming children (Howell, 1979, pp. 53–54).
These constraints on polygyny peak in Arctic tundra environments, where women have few opportunities for food gathering. Parallel to this trend, death rates among young men peak in the continental Arctic. OSRs should therefore be most skewed among hunter-gatherers (or rather hunters) living on continental Arctic tundra. Today, this environment is a shadow of its former self, both in the size of its migrating herds and in the extent of its land mass, essentially the northern fringes of mainland Eurasia and North America. Most of its indigenous peoples–low-Arctic Inuit, Chukchi, Yukaghir, Tungus, Nenets, and Sami (Lapps)–rely on a mix of maritime fishing and inland hunting; thus, their OSR characteristics are, at best, indicative of Upper Paleolithic conditions. Nonetheless, if we look at the Labrador Inuit of the 19th century, a very lopsided sex ratio appears at all reproductive ages, with many women, especially widows, shut out of the marriage market entirely (Scheffel, 1984). In the Siberian Arctic east of the Taymyr Peninsula, in the 18th to early 20th centuries, women outnumbered men at all reproductive ages because the men still followed reindeer on foot and suffered proportionately higher death rates. (Krupnik, 1985). OSR skewing seems to have occurred even further west, where reindeer were already semidomesticated in historic times. Sami of 18th to 19th century Finland had female-biased OSRs, although the same was true among the mainly agricultural Finns (Lummaa et al., 1998). Indeed, female-biased OSRs prevailed in most preindustrial European societies, reflecting perhaps the key importance of paternal investment and also cultural constraints on polygyny that predated Christianity (Seccombe, 1992, pp. 184–190; Sherman, 1922, Vol. II, p. 475; Tacitus, 1970, 18; Vatin, 1970, p. 201).
North of the continental Arctic, in the extreme Arctic, OSRs were more evenly balanced and sometimes had a male surplus (Schrire & Steiger, 1974). First, male mortality was lower. Men hunted dispersed marine animals and thus avoided the ‘feast or famine’ dilemma that occurred when hunting spatially concentrated terrestrial herbivores. Second, female mortality was higher, specifically female infanticide. In the extreme Arctic, parents viewed the prospects for a daughter as problematic. She would have trouble finding a husband locally (the low carrying capacity of the land limited the local group's size), and thus she would probably marry into another group and not support her parents later on, either directly or through her future husband (Balikci, 1967, Riches, 1974 and Smith & Smith, 1994). At lower latitudes, where the land had a higher carrying capacity, female infanticide occurred much less often, apparently because bigger and closer groups allowed women to marry locally and provide their parents with ‘son-in-law payback’ (Riches, 1974 and Schrire & Steiger, 1974).
4. Peopling of the Eurasian tundra belt
Modern humans penetrated the Eurasian tundra belt no earlier than 35,000 years ago, at first in its most southerly and resource-rich portion—southwestern France (Mellars, 1985). This ‘beachhead’ was dissected by valleys that offered wild fruits, grains, tubers, salmon, and non-Arctic game, as well as migrating reindeer in the fall and winter (Blades, 1999a, Blades, 1999b and Mellars, 1985). The reindeer may have drawn humans out of the sheltered valleys, briefly at first, and then for longer periods, as hunting bands adapted to the new niche. Eventually, some bands left the valleys to hunt year-round on the surrounding tundra plains. The initial founder group may have been small, as suggested by the very low genetic variability of northern Europeans today (Reich et al., 2001). There then seems to have been rapid growth (perhaps reflected in the spread of the Gravettian culture) with the front of the demographic expansion spreading eastward into the Central Russian Plain and ultimately reaching Siberia and Beringia by the end of the last interglacial approximately 25,000 BP (Goebel, 1999, Pitulko et al., 2004 and Soffer, 1985, p. 238; Soffer et al., 1993).
Thus, when the last ice age began, a single human population occupied a corridor stretching from Europe to Beringia. This inference is supported by several lines of evidence. A Y chromosome study has found that all North Eurasian peoples descend from a common ancestral population dated to about 15,000 BP (Stepanov & Puzyrev, 2000; see also Armour et al., 1996, Santos et al., 1999 and Zerjal et al., 1997). The language families of northern Eurasia, particularly Uralic and Yukaghir and more generally Uralic-Yukaghir, Eskimo-Aleut, Chukotko-Kamchatkan, and Altaic, share deep structural affinities that point to a common origin and not simply to word borrowing (Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994, pp. 97–99; Fortescue, 1998 and Rogers, 1986). Archeological evidence (characteristic lithic technology, grave goods with red ocher, and sites with small shallow basins) also suggests a common cultural tradition throughout Europe and Siberia 20,000 to 15,000 years ago (Goebel, 1999, Haynes, 1980 and Haynes, 1982). Finally, dental and cranial remains from Mal'ta (23,000–20,000 BP) in southern Siberia indicate strong affinities with Upper Paleolithic Europeans (Alexeyev & Gokhman, 1994 and Goebel, 1999).
This Eurasian population would have broken up at the glacial maximum (20,000–15,000 BP). East–west gene flow was severely constricted by the merging of the Fenno-Scandian and Ural icecaps and by the formation of large glacial lakes along the Ob (Rogers, 1986 and Crawford et al., 1997). At the same time, both sides of this ice-age barrier saw sharp declines in human population (Goebel, 1999 and Hahn, 1987). After the glacial maximum, cultural and biological unity continued to disintegrate as part of a trend toward higher population densities, regional diversification, and probably more restricted breeding units (Formicola & Giannecchini, 1999).
As gene flow declined between the two ends of the Eurasian tundra belt, selection pressures would have become more localized. Sexual selection, in particular, would have varied in intensity with regional OSR differences. This may explain why hair- and eye-color diversity arose in Europe but not in Asia—where hair is uniformly black and eyes uniformly brown. The eastern end of the Eurasian tundra belt differed from the western end in two OSR-relevant ways. First, its narrower width constrained herbivore mobility, thus shortening hunting distances and reducing hunting deaths among young men. Male mortality would have further decreased after the glacial maximum: An absence of base camps in the archeological record suggests that residential units were dispersing to exploit a variety of resources with shorter hunting distances (Goebel, 1999, p. 223). Second, the eastern Eurasian tundra had higher latitudes, lower carrying capacity, and a more dispersed human population, thus providing the same environmental conditions that in more recent times have led to female infanticide in the extreme Arctic. These two factors, shorter hunting distances and increased female infanticide, would have resulted in a more balanced OSR and, consequently, less sexual selection to diversify hair and eye color.
Such diversification would have begun in western Eurasia no earlier than 20,000 BP, given the uniform black hair and brown eyes of populations east of the ice-age barrier in eastern Eurasia. If the beginning of human history marks the latest end date, we are left with a maximum timeframe of 14,000 years. This is fast evolutionary change for human pigmentation, which elsewhere has responded more slowly to selection by the natural environment. A full range of environments, from the Arctic to the Tropics, has not caused the Amerindians to differentiate in hair, eye, or skin color, despite their being in the Americas for approximately 15,000 years.
5. Diversification of European hair color
The MC1R gene determines hair color by controlling the production of eumelanin (brown and black pigments) and pheomelanin (red and yellow pigments). It is unusually polymorphic in humans, both in its high number of alleles and in its high ratio of nonsynonymous (phenotypically distinct) to synonymous (phenotypically identical) alleles (Box et al., 1997, Flanagan et al., 2000, Harding et al., 2000, Rana et al., 1999 and Rees, 2000). Whereas most genes have more synonymous alleles than nonsynonymous ones, the reverse is true for human MC1R (Rana et al., 1999).
Nonsynonymous MC1R alleles are distributed differently in European and non-European populations: 11 in Europeans, 5 in Asians, and 1 in Africans (Harding et al., 2000, p. 1355). Furthermore, the Asian alleles differ little in their phenotypic effects. Harding et al. (2000) attribute the high MC1R diversity of Europeans to relaxed selection for dark skin outside the tropical zone. This would account for the redhead alleles, which are linked to skin depigmentation, but not for the other alleles. Relaxed selection also fails to explain the low MC1R diversity of non-tropical Asians. Nonetheless, Harding et al. (2000) advance three arguments for relaxed selection, rather than positive selection, to explain the high MC1R diversity of Europeans. The first argument is that relaxed selection has produced a comparable level of diversity at the β-globin locus. Yet β-globin variants clearly have selective value, as indicated by heterozygote advantage and the short time span (less than 5000 years) over which the β-globin polymorphism has evolved (Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994, pp. 149–152). The second argument is that the ratio of nonsynonymous to synonymous alleles is only 10 to 3 in Eurasia and thus comparable to the ratio of 10 nonsynonymous to 6 synonymous MC1R substitutions that separate humans from chimpanzees. The data in table 1 of their article, however, indicate a ratio of 12 to 3 (2 redhead alleles are excluded because they came from a study that specifically looked for them). In any case, the 10 to 6 ratio separating humans from chimpanzees is hardly a benchmark for neutral selection: Ratios greater than 1 are normally deemed to be evidence of positive selection, and such selection has acted on MC1R in some primate lineages (Mundy & Kelly, 2003). Finally, the third argument against positive selection is that MC1R diversity does not depart significantly from the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, there being neither excess homozygotes nor excess heterozygotes. No such departure, however, would be expected, inasmuch as MC1R heterozygotes exhibit partial effects (Flanagan et al., 2000 and Rees, 2000).
6. Discussion
One might object that sexual selection could not have diversified European hair and eye color because there is no sexual dimorphism in these traits. Had women been selected for a diversity of hair and eye colors, they would now be more diverse in this respect than men are. It should be noted, however, that both hair and eye colors are, at best, weakly sex-linked; hence, selection acting on women should have affected men and women equally until sex-linked alleles had arisen through chance mutations. The original alleles (i.e., the non-sex-linked ones) could then have been selected out, but only if men were somehow disadvantaged by the novel hair and eye colors. For most animals, the disadvantage is an increased risk of predation, which will reduce highly visible colors in the sex that does not need them. For early Europeans, such a disadvantage would have been slight. Even wolves were more likely to be prey than predators (Hoffecker, 2002, pp. 180–183, 225, 241–242).
This being said, some hair and eye colors seem to be sex linked. Blond hair darkens with age more slowly in women than in men (Olivier, 1960, p. 74). Furthermore, prenatal exposure to estrogen, as indicated by digit ratio, appears to be higher in individuals with blond hair or non-brown eyes (Mather et al., unpublished). If a sex difference does indeed exist in these novel hair and eye colors, it seems to be expressed only right after puberty. It was notably absent in the 18-to-38 year olds studied by Mather et al. (unpublished).
Besides diversifying European hair and eye color, sexual selection may have accentuated existing sexual dimorphisms. Several studies have found wider hips, narrower waists, and thicker deposition of subcutaneous fat in women of European descent than in women of other origins (Hrdlička, 1898, Meredith & Spurgeon, 1980 and Nelson & Nelson, 1986). Even before birth, Euro-American fetuses show significantly more sexual dimorphism than do African-American fetuses (Choi & Trotter, 1970). The proximal cause may be lower androgen production than in women of sub-Saharan African descent (Falkner et al., 1999) and higher estrogen production and lower fecal excretion of estrogen than in women of north/east Asian descent (Adlercreutz et al., 1994, Coker et al., 1997, Key et al., 1990, Taioli et al., 1996 and Wang et al., 1991). Prenatal exposure to estrogen, as indicated by digit ratio, may also be higher in European women, albeit with much interpopulation variation (Manning et al., 2000; Manning, J. T. (2003). Personal communication). This variation may reflect a maternal-age effect: digit ratio is higher in Catholic countries like Poland and Spain, where mothers generally bear children in their 20s, than in Germany and Finland, where more mothers bear children in their 30s (Manning et al., 2000).
Sexual selection may have also lightened European skin color. The extreme depigmentation of northern and eastern Europeans deviates markedly from the much weaker north–south gradient in skin color of other human populations (the latter gradient may reflect selection pressures to maintain a critical level of vitamin D synthesis). Yet the geographic extent of this extreme depigmentation does not coincide with a specific pattern of solar radiation: Skies are generally overcast over coastal northwestern Europe and become clearer and typically continental further east. It does coincide, however, with the area where hair and eye color has diversified (Fig. 4). Aside from red hair, the color of the hair and eyes is not genetically linked to skin color (Flanagan et al., 2000 and Sturm et al., 2001). It seems, therefore, that a common selective force has acted simultaneously on skin, hair, and eye color within this geographic area while being absent at similar latitudes in northern Asia and North America (Frost, 1994a and Manning et al., 2004).
Fig. 4. Skin-color depigmentation in Eurasia approximately 500 BP (after Brace, 1973, p. 344, reprinted with permission from Wiley).
If this common selective force were sexual selection, it could have lightened European skin color by acting on an existing sexual dimorphism. Men and women differ in complexion because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939, Frost, 1988, Frost, 2005, Hulse, 1967 and Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and immediately before are actually darker than boys). Investigators also try to exclude tanning by measuring under the arm, where there is less subcutaneous fat and probably less dimorphism in skin color, given that the lightness of a woman's skin correlates with the thickness of her subcutaneous fat (Mazess, 1967). In any event, sexual selection may have targeted this sex difference, as suggested by a cross-cultural male preference for lighter complexioned women and, conversely, by some evidence of a female preference for darker complexioned men (Aoki, 2002, Feinman & Gill, 1978, Frost, 1988, Frost, 1994b, Frost, 2005 and Van den Berghe & Frost, 1986).
Among ancestral Europeans, such selection, even if acting only on women, would have lightened the complexions of both sexes because most skin-color genes are not sex linked. Nonetheless, some of these genes are; thus, there should have been some selective pressure to make European skin color more sexually dimorphic. Yet skin color actually seems to be less sexually dimorphic in light-skinned populations (Relethford et al., 1985). The reason may be a ceiling effect. As ancestral Europeans approached the phenotypic limit of maximum skin depigmentation, further lightening would have become harder to achieve for women than for men, with the result that sexual selection, although acting primarily on women, lightened men more.
In conclusion, sexual selection may have acted on all three color traits in northern and eastern Europe, with hair and eye color being diversified and skin color lightened. This hypothesis is consistent with the narrow timeframe for the evolution of these traits, their geographic distribution, and the large number of alleles involved.
Acknowledgments
I wish to thank Dr. John Thomas Manning, who independently came to similar conclusions as I did, despite his approaching the question from a different academic perspective and drawing on a different body of evidence. This ‘repeatability of conclusions’ is further support for the arguments presented here.
References
Adlercreutz et al., 1994 H. Adlercreutz, S.L. Gorbach, B.R. Goldin, M.N. Woods, J.T. Dwyer and E. Hämäläinen, Estrogen metabolism and excretion in Oriental and Caucasian Women, Journal of the National Cancer Institute 86 (1994), pp. 1076–1082.
Alexeyev & Gokhman, 1994 V.P. Alexeyev and I.I. Gokhman, Skeletal remains of infants from a burial on the Mal'ta Upper Paleolithic site, Homo 45 (1994), pp. 119–126.
Anderson, 1969 W.W. Anderson, Polymorphism resulting from the mating advantage of rare male genotypes, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 64 (1969), pp. 190–197.
Aoki, 2002 K. Aoki, Sexual selection as a cause of human skin colour variation: Darwin's hypothesis revisited, Annals of Human Biology 29 (2002), pp. 589–608.
Armour et al., 1996 J.A.L. Armour, T. Anttinen, C.A. May, E.E. Vega, A. Sajantila, J.R. Kidd, K.K. Kidd, J. Bertranpetit, S. Paabo and A.J. Jeffreys, Minisatellite diversity supports a recent African origin for modern humans, Nature Genetics 13 (1996), pp. 154–160.
Balikci, 1967 A. Balikci, Female infanticide on the Arctic coast, Man 2 (1967), pp. 615–625.
Beals & Hoijer, 1965 R.L. Beals and H. Hoijer, An introduction to anthropology (3rd ed.), Macmillan, New York (1965).
Binford, 1968 S.R. Binford, A structural comparison of disposal of the dead in the Mousterian and the Upper Paleolithic, Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 24 (1968), pp. 139–151.
Birket-Smith, 1929 K. Birket-Smith, The Caribou Eskimos. Material and social life and their cultural position. In: K. Rasmussen, Editor, Report of the 5th Thule expedition vol. 5, Nordisk Forlag, Copenhagen (1929), pp. 1921–1924.
Blades, 1999a B.S. Blades, Aurignacian settlement patterns in the Vézère valley, Current Anthropology 40 (1999), pp. 712–719.
Blades, 1999b B.S. Blades, Aurignacian lithic economy and early modern human mobility: New perspectives from classic sites in the Vézère valley of France, Journal of Human Evolution 37 (1999), pp. 91–120.
Box et al., 1997 N.F. Box, J.R. Wyeth, L.E. O'Gorman, N.G. Martin and R.A. Sturm, Characterization of melanocyte stimulating hormone receptor variant alleles in twins with red hair, Human Molecular Genetics 6 (1997), pp. 1891–1897.
Brace, 1973 C.L. Brace, A nonracial approach towards the understanding of human diversity. In: C.L. Brace and J. Metress, Editors, Man in evolutionary perspective, Wiley, New York (1973), pp. 341–363.
Brooks, 2002 R. Brooks, Variation in female mate choice within guppy populations: Population divergence, multiple ornaments and the maintenance of polymorphism, Genetica 116 (2002), pp. 343–358.
Butzer, 1964 K.W. Butzer, Environment and archaeology, Aldine, Chicago (1964).
Caramelli et al., 2003 D. Caramelli, C. Laluez-Fox, C. Vernesi, M. Lari, A. Casoli, F. Mallegni, B. Chiarelli, I. Dupanloup, J. Bertranpetit, G. Barbujani and G. Bertorelle, Evidence for a genetic discontinuity between Neanderthals and 24,000-year-old anatomically modern Europeans, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100 (2003), pp. 6593–6597.
Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994 L.L. Cavalli-Sforza, P. Menozzi and A. Piazza, The history and geography of human genes, Princeton University Press, Princeton (1994).
Choi & Trotter, 1970 S.C. Choi and M.A. Trotter, Statistical study of the multivariate structure and race–sex differences of American White and Negro fetal skeletons, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 33 (1970), pp. 307–312.
Coker et al., 1997 A.L. Coker, M.M. Crane, R.P. Sticca and D.W. Sepkovic, Re: Ethnic differences in estrogen metabolism in healthy women, Journal of the National Cancer Institute 89 (1997), pp. 89–90.
Crawford et al., 1997 M.H. Crawford, J.T. Williams and R. Duggirala, Genetic structure of the indigenous populations of Siberia, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 104 (1997), pp. 177–192.
Dahlberg & Carbonell, 1961 A.A. Dahlberg and V.M. Carbonell, The dentition of the Magdalenian female from Cap Blanc, France, Man 61 (1961), pp. 49–50.
Dickson, 1990 D.B. Dickson, The dawn of belief. Religion in the upper Paleolithic of Southwestern Europe, University of Arizona Press, Tucson (1990).
Dupanloup et al., 2003 I. Dupanloup, L. Pereira, G. Bertorelle, F. Calafell, M.J. Prata, A. Amorim and G. Barbujani, A recent shift from polygyny to monogamy in humans is suggested by the analysis of worldwide Y-chromosome diversity, Journal of Molecular Evolution 57 (2003), pp. 85–97.
Edwards & Duntley, 1939 E.A. Edwards and S.Q. Duntley, The pigments and color of living human skin, American Journal of Anatomy 65 (1939), pp. 1–33.
Eiberg & Mohr, 1987 H. Eiberg and J. Mohr, Major genes of eye color and hair color linked to LU and SE, Clinical Genetics 31 (1987), pp. 186–191.
Ellis, 1928 H. Ellis, Studies in the psychology of sex, Sexual selection in man vol. IV, F.A. Davis Company, Philadelphia (1928).
Endler, 1980 J.A. Endler, Natural selection on color patterns in Poecilia reticulata, Evolution 34 (1980), pp. 76–91.
Endler, 1991 J.A. Endler, Variation in the appearance of guppy color patterns to guppies and their predators under different visual conditions, Vision Research 31 (1991), pp. 587–608.
Falkner et al., 1999 B. Falkner, K. Sherif, A. Sumner and H. Kushner, Hyperinsulinism and sex hormones in young adult African Americans, Metabolism, Clinical and Experimental 48 (1999), pp. 107–112.
Farr, 1980 J.A. Farr, Social behavior patterns as determinants of reproductive success in the guppy Poecilia reticulata Peters (Pisces: Poeciliidae), Behaviour 74 (1980), pp. 38–91.
Feinman & Gill, 1978 S. Feinman and G.W. Gill, Sex differences in physical attractiveness preferences, Journal of Social Psychology 105 (1978), pp. 43–52.
Flanagan et al., 2000 N. Flanagan, E. Healy, A. Ray, S. Philips, C. Todd, I.J. Jackson, M.A. Birch-Machin and J.L. Rees, Pleiotropic effects of the melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) gene on human pigmentation, Human Molecular Genetics 9 (2000), pp. 2531–2537.
Formicola & Giannecchini, 1999 V. Formicola and M. Giannecchini, Evolutionary trends of stature in upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europe, Journal of Human Evolution 36 (1999), pp. 319–333.
Fortescue, 1998 M.D. Fortescue, Language relations across Bering strait. Reappraising the archaeological and linguistic evidence, Cassell, London (1998).
Frost, 1988 P. Frost, Human skin color: A possible relationship between its sexual dimorphism and its social perception, Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 32 (1988), pp. 38–58.
Frost, 1994a P. Frost, Geographic distribution of human skin colour: A selective compromise between natural selection and sexual selection?, Human Evolution 9 (1994), pp. 141–153.
Frost, 1994b P. Frost, Preference for darker faces in photographs at different phases of the menstrual cycle: Preliminary assessment of evidence for a hormonal relationship, Perceptual and Motor Skills 79 (1994), pp. 507–514.
Frost, 2005 P. Frost, Fair women, dark men. The forgotten roots of color prejudice, Cybereditions, Christchurch, New Zealand (2005).
Goebel, 1999 T. Goebel, Pleistocene human colonization of Siberia and peopling of the Americas: An ecological approach, Evolutionary Anthropology 8 (1999), pp. 208–227.
Grant et al., 1974 B. Grant, A. Snyder and S.F. Glessner, Frequency-dependent mate selection in Mormoniella vitripennis, Evolution 28 (1974), pp. 259–264.
Hahn, 1987 J. Hahn, Aurignacian and Gravettian settlement patterns in Central Europe. In: O. Soffer, Editor, The Pleistocene old world, Plenum, New York (1987), pp. 251–261.
Hamilton & Zuk, 1982 W.D. Hamilton and M. Zuk, Heritable true fitness and bright birds: A role for parasites?, Science 218 (1982), pp. 384–386.
Harding et al., 2000 R.M. Harding, E. Healy, A.J. Ray, N.S. Ellis, N. Flanagan, C. Todd, C. Dixon, A. Sajantila, I.J. Jackson, M.A. Birch-Machin and J.L. Rees, Evidence for variable selective pressures at MC1R, American Journal of Human Genetics 66 (2000), pp. 1351–1361.
Harrold, 1980 F.B. Harrold, A comparative analysis of Eurasian Paleolithic burials, World Archaeology 12 (1980), pp. 195–211.
Haynes, 1980 C.V. Haynes, The Clovis culture, Canadian Journal of Anthropology 1 (1980), pp. 115–121.
Haynes, 1982 C.V. Haynes, Were Clovis progenitors in Beringia?. In: D.M. Hopkins, Editor, Paleoecology of Beringia, Academic Press, New York (1982), pp. 383–398.
Hodge, ([1905]1959) F.W. Hodge, Handbook of American Indians north of Mexico. Part 1, Pageant, New York ([1905]1959).
Hoffecker, 2002 J.F. Hoffecker, Desolate landscapes. Ice-age settlement in Eastern Europe, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick (2002).
Howell, 1979 N. Howell, Demography of the Dobe !Kung, Academic Press, New York (1979).
Hrdlička, 1898 A. Hrdlička, Physical differences between white and colored children, American Anthropologist 11 (1898), pp. 347–350.
Hughes et al., 1999 K.A. Hughes, L. Du, F.H. Rodd and D.N. Reznick, Familiarity leads to female mate preference for novel males in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata, Animal Behaviour 58 (1999), pp. 907–916.
Hulse, 1967 F.S. Hulse, Selection for skin color among the Japanese, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 27 (1967), pp. 143–156.
Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000 N.G. Jablonski and G. Chaplin, The evolution of human skin coloration, Journal of Human Evolution 39 (2000), pp. 57–106.
Kelly, 1955 R.L. Kelly, The foraging spectrum. Diversity in hunter-gatherer lifeways, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington (1955).
Key et al., 1990 T.J.A. Key, J. Chen, D.Y. Wang, M.C. Pike and J. Boreham, Sex hormones in women in rural China and in Britain, British Journal of Cancer 62 (1990), pp. 631–636.
Kirkpatrick, 1987 M. Kirkpatrick, Sexual selection by female choice in polygynous animals, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 18 (1987), pp. 43–70.
Kjellström, 1973 R. Kjellström, Eskimo marriage. An account of traditional Eskimo courtship and marriage, Nordiska Museets Handlingar 80, Lund (1973).
Kozlowski & Sachse-Kozlowska, 1995 S.K. Kozlowski and E. Sachse-Kozlowska, Magdalenian family from the Maszycka Cave, Jahrbuch der Römisch Germanischen Zentral Museums Mainz 40 (1995), pp. 115–205.
Krings et al., 1999 M. Krings, H. Geisert, R.W. Schmitz, H. Krainitzki and S. Pääbo, DNA sequence of the mitochondrial hypervariable region II from the Neanderthal type specimen, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96 (1999), pp. 5581–5585.
Krupnik, 1985 I.I. Krupnik, The male–female ratio in certain traditional populations of the Siberian Arctic, Inuit Studies 9 (1985), pp. 115–140.
Lank, 2002 D.B. Lank, Diverse processes maintain plumage polymorphisms in birds, Journal of Avian Biology 33 (2002), pp. 327–330.
Lummaa et al., 1998 V. Lummaa, J. Merila and A. Kause, Adaptive sex ratio variation in pre-industrial human (Homo sapiens) populations?, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B 265 (1998), pp. 563–568.
Mallegni & Fabbri, 1995 F. Mallegni and P.F. Fabbri, The human skeletal remains from the Upper Paleolithic burials found in Romito Cave (Papasidero, Cosenza, Italy), Bulletin et Mémoires de la Société d'Anthropologie de Paris, n.s 7 (1995), pp. 99–137.
Manning, 1979 A. Manning, An introduction to animal behaviour, Edward Arnold, London (1979).
Manning et al., 2000 J.T. Manning, L. Barley, I. Lewis-Jones, J. Walton, R.L. Trivers, R. Thornhill, D. Singh, P. Rhode, T. Bereckzei, P. Henzi, M. Soler and A. Sved, The 2nd to 4th digit ratio, sexual dimorphism, population differences and reproductive success: Evidence for sexually antagonistic genes, Evolution and Human Behavior 21 (2000), pp. 163–183.
Manning et al., 2004 J.T. Manning, P.E. Bundred and F.M. Mather, Second to fourth digit ratio, sexual selection, and skin colour, Evolution and Human Behavior 25 (2004), pp. 38–50.
Martin, 1974 M.K. Martin, The foraging adaptation—Uniformity or diversity?, Addison-Wesley Module in anthropology 56, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass (1974).
Mason et al., 1994 S.L.R. Mason, J.G. Hather and G.C. Hillman, Preliminary investigation of the plant macro-remains from Dolní Věstonice II, and its implications for the role of plant foods in Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Europe, Antiquity 68 (1994), pp. 48–57.
Mather et al., unpublished Mather, F., Manning, J.T., Bundred, P.E. (unpublished). 2nd to 4th digit ratio, hair and eye colour in Caucasians: Evidence for blond hair as a correlate of high prenatal oestrogen.
Mazess, 1967 R.B. Mazess, Skin color in Bahamian Negroes, Human Biology 39 (1967), pp. 145–154.
Mellars, 1985 P.A. Mellars, The ecological basis of social complexity in the Upper Paleolithic of Southwestern France. In: T.D. Price and J.A. Brown, Editors, Prehistoric hunter-gatherers. The emergence of cultural complexity, Academic Press, Orlando (1985), pp. 271–297.
Meredith & Spurgeon, 1980 H.V. Meredith and J.H. Spurgeon, Somatic comparisons at age 9 years for South Carolina White Girls and girls of other ethnic groups, Human Biology 52 (1980), pp. 401–411.
Muggleton, 1979 J. Muggleton, Non-random mating in wild populations of polymorphic Adalia Bipunctata, Heredity 42 (1979), pp. 57–65.
Mundy & Kelly, 2003 N.I. Mundy and J. Kelly, Evolution of a pigmentation gene, the melanocortin-1 receptor, in primates, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121 (2003), pp. 67–80.
Nelson & Nelson, 1986 J.K. Nelson and K.R. Nelson, Skinfold profiles of Black and White boys and girls ages 11–13, Human Biology 58 (1986), pp. 379–390.
Nordenskiold, 1882 A.E. Nordenskiold, The voyage of the Vega round Asia and Europe, with a historical review of previous journeys along the north coast of the old world, Macmillan & Co., New York (1882).
Remaining references in comments.
Posted by J Richards on Monday, February 27, 2006 at 11:26 PM in Anthropology, Genetics & Human Bio-Diversity, Race realism
Comments (859) | Tell a friend
Comments:
Page 4 of 9 pages « FirstP < 2 3 4 5 6 > Last »
Posted by dan mohan on May 26, 2006, 02:10 PM | #
DEAR J.RICHARDS,
REFERRING TO YOUR PASSAGE
On the other hand, it is obvious what kind of women are most desired internationally: Nordic women. For instance, in the U.S., blonde hair dye outsells all other hair dyes by a huge margin among young women, and people around the globe seeking cosmetic surgery to improve their faces try to make their faces shift closer to the Euro-Nordic average.
COME ON WAKE UP MY DEAR ARE NORDIC WOMEN THE MOST SOUGHT OUT INTERNATIONALLY I HAVE NEVER READ THAT ANYWHERE I AM A CONSTANT NET USER I HAVE NEVER COME ACROSS SUCH NEWS.SEEING TO THE ASIAN AND MUSLIM COUNTRIES PEOPLE IN THESE PLACES HAVE BLACK HAIR AND THEY ACTUALLY HATE BLONDE HAIR AS IT WONT LOOK GOOD WITH THIER COMPLEXION.BUT THESE PEOPLE COLOUR THEIR HAIR BLONDE AND WITH OTHER COLOURS AS IT IS A STYLE PATTERN AND NOT TO LOOK NORDIC.IT IS FACT IN THESE ABOVE COUNTRIES THAT ONLY OLDER PEOPLE ABOVE 60’S AGE HAS WHITE OR BLONDE HAIR DUE TO AGING.
AND IN USA PEOPLE MAY USE BLONDE DYES THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY WANT TO LOOK NORDIC.
THEN ANOTHER ABSURD THING ABOUT PLASTIC SURGERY PEOPLE IN ASIAN COUNTRIES AND MUSLIM COUNTRIES WHICH HAS THE LARGEST POPULATION IN THE WORLD IF WANT TO GO FOR A PLASTIC SURGERY THEY WILL NEVER OPT FOR NORDIC FEATURES BECAUSE TO THESE PEOPLE NORDIC AND WHITES FROM USA OR ANY OTHER WHITE COUNTRY IS THE SAME.AND FOR MANY OF THESE ABOVE COUNTRIES THE PEOPLE THINK THE BOLLYWOOD STARS AS THE ULTIMATE PARAMETERS FOR BEAUTY SO SAYINS THAT AROUND THE GLOBE PEOPLE OPT FOR NORDIC FEATURES FOR PLASTIC SURGERY IS ABSURD AND BASELESS.
AND IN THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL NORDIC WOMEN ARE NOT THE ULTIMATE FIGURES OF BEAUTY MOST BEAUTIFUL WOMEN COMES FROM AROUND THE GLOBE AND VOTED BY MEN ARE LIKE ASHWARYA RAI,AGELINA JOLIE,QUEEN OF JORDAN. DONT MISTAKE THAT EVERY MAN AROUND THE WORLD LOOKK FOR NORDIC FEATURES IN WOMEN
Posted by dan mohan on May 27, 2006, 08:26 AM | #
dear j.richards
i feel that you are frustrated that the nordic women never come on the list of most beautiful women in the world and that they are not recognized in the international stage as the main focus is always on the women who are nonnordics and non-white.Come on accept the truth that with all that nordic facial features of ur womens they are still not that beautiful or any way near to ashwarya rai or angelina jolie or queen of jordan when it comes to beauty
Posted by Daqnie on May 27, 2006, 08:38 AM | #
Comparing Third-world women to European women is bit like comparing a mud hut to a palace
Posted by Jim Kale on May 27, 2006, 09:29 AM | #
Your comparison of “pretty” women to that of the untouchable women is flawed. As someone who is familiar with the world of modeling, I can tell you those “pretty” women don’t get out of bed looking that good. They are wearing tons of makeup which is applied almost scientifically to highlight their best features and hide their worst. But it doesn’t end there. When the makeup artist is done with them the photography gets a go at them. manipulating the lighting so it’s just right. Some of the photos are furher “enhanced” via photoshoping.
There is no doubt these women aren’t ugly in general, however, without makeup they are certainly not vastly prettier than some of those untouchable women, who would fix up very nicely or even more so than the “pretty” women.
It is something to note that the “pretty” Indian women are of vastly lighter skin tone than the untouchables. This isn’t by chance. India, as most of the world, is partial to light skinned women. As far as physical environment is concerned, light skin has very little benefits in most of the world, as it damages very easily.
However, light skin has social advantage. In areas where medium dark skin is the norm (populations that are dark but not so dark that they don’t tan), a person who spent all day out in the fields tanned, and thus grew darker. A person of higher social class, who did not have to work outside, and thus did not tan, remained lighter and so light skin was associated with a higher social class, making it more desirable.
Posted by Tyen on May 27, 2006, 07:34 PM | #
Dear J. Richards
You misunderstood Venican’s post. You can’t claim that the only reason why Indians cluster with Europeans is because they’re mixed race, because even the pure blood Dravidians of Southern India are on the Caucasoid branch and they have zero European ancestry.
Also it’s absurd to adjust Indian IQ’s by only 5 points when their environments and exposure to Western culture is far inferior to that of whites circa 1900 who saw their IQ’s rise 20-40 points as urbanization and industrialization became widespread. Thus you MUST add 20-40 points to India’s IQ’s if you wish to make a genetic comparison regardless of what part of the curve you feel is responsible for the rise.
If you don’t believe IQ gains among whites were really so great than read the extensive documentation James Flynn has compiled in THE RISING CURVE about the Flynn Effect which makes clear it was at least 20 points (and perhaps double that, especially since it’s STILL CONTINUING)
NOw your argument that whites are the best at sports is really desperate. Even racialists like JP Rushton say that Blacks are the best physically (jump higher, stronger, faster, larger penises) but claims Orientals are the best mentally (highest IQ’s, fastest complex reaction times, largest brains for body size, early civilization).
According to Rushton’s theory, Whites are in the middle on all traits, however this might give them the optimum balance of intellect, athleticism, and personality, that has made them so influential for the past few centuries.
Posted by J Richards on May 28, 2006, 04:43 AM | #
Shankho,
Comparisons of attractiveness are not entirely subjective. People have their own preferences, but this does not mean that one cannot compare, for instance, who has finer facial features.
at a genetic level we wish to breed with some one with a genetic makeup more different than ours to increase variation and resistance to diseases etc.
Hence, one should avoid breeding with blood relatives. However, race mixing increases the odds of producing children with a higher incidence of health problems (also see supporting evidence).
The reason that I put up this entry is because Peter Frost’s paper is of interest to Northern Europeans, and this entry also illustrates the disastrous aesthetic consequences of race mixing for whites. Some people are bound to find it offensive, but I did not put it up to offend people, and I do not date Asians.
Many Hindus are white? I have never seen one unless you are talking about white Hare Krishnas, but Hindus from India generally don’t regard them as Hindus.
I have not contradicted myself by pointing out the 106 average IQ of Asian-Americans in reference to the 103 average IQ of white Americans. Among Asian-Americans, the South Asians are highly unrepresentative of South Asia. The NE Asians and whites in America are more representative of NE Asia and Europe, respectively, but then NE Asians are known to slightly outscore whites on IQ tests. The latter is not a contradiction. The correlation between predominant skin color of a population and its average IQ is -0.92, not -1.0, which means that there will be some examples of somewhat darker indigenous populations with slightly higher IQs than a lighter indigenous population. In any case, a number of NE Asians produce as much melanin as whites do, but look darker because their skin is thicker (hence the yellow color). Besides, the study that I cited used IQ values from indigenous populations, not diaspora populations to avoid problems of selective migration and also to relate the correlation to variables such as distance from the equator and climate. Asian-Americans and whites in the U.S. are not indigenous to the Americas.
--------------------------------------
Dan Mohan,
I cited a paper by Rhodes in a previous comment regarding what makes faces attractive. This paper shows that beauty is not entirely subjective, i.e., you cannot say that beauty lies in the eye of the beholder and pretend that there is no broad agreement. If you believe that the pictures of the East Indians posted by Indian girl show Nordic-featured women, then this is another example of your poor perception since not one of these women have Nordic facial features.
The woman next to Mallika Sherawat has a small, hooked nose with a flat bridge? Are you visually impaired? Not one of these things is true! I would never post a woman with this kind of nose. The woman has a narrower nose than Mallika. Besides, you have glossed over the large number of hook-nosed East Indian women, including your beloved Aishwarya Rai, posted within this thread and some data that I previously cited showing that the frequency of hooked noses is higher in India than in Northern Europe.
So you think that Manisha Koirala has beautiful teeth but the woman next to her has big, ugly teeth? The picture that shows Manisha Koirala’s teeth also shows a flattened face and a hooked nose, things that you have not commented on. The Nordic woman next to her is smiling and hence her teeth are showing, and they don’t appear to be ugly. Besides, East and South Asians have larger teeth, on average, than Nordics.
You have critiqued the woman compared to Asin as having a nose that looks unnatural, artificial, and like a wooden log chopped to fit as a nose! Wow! You have ignored Asin’s broader and hooked nose with a flatter nose bridge (see second posted picture of her). Straight, narrow and fine noses are bound to look unnatural to Hindus like you.
As I said before, I am tired of having to deal with Aishwarya Rai. You have, like many others, pointed out the accolades she has received, failing to see that these accolades have been on the part of many East Indians, and a few magazine editors or prominent organizations such as Miss World Org., and they do not reflect the views of the general Western public. Lists of the most beautiful/sexy women in the world are typically based on the decisions of a handful of magazine editors who choose among famous women. Thus, it should not be surprising if a former Miss World and prominent Indian actress makes it in some such lists, but this does not mean that most people around the world find her attractive. Some of these top lists feature the likes of manly women such as Gisele Bundchen, showing that they have little to do with beauty. Aishwarya’s pictures speak for her looks; there is no need to refer to what kind of praise she has received or how many fans she has among whites, which are surely few.
You said that just because a large number of women dye their hair blonde in the U.S. it does not mean that they are trying to look Nordic. Then why are these women dying their hair blonde? Obviously to attract men; the majority of white men prefer blondes. You said that black-haired people in Asian and Muslim countries actually hate blonde hair because it wouldn’t go with their complexion, but some of them color their hair blonde for style? This is insane.
Your English skills could surely need some improvement. I have not implied that people seeking cosmetic surgery around the world are trying to look Nordic. What I said was that they are trying to shift their facial features closer to the Euro-Nordic norm. I don’t see why you should have a problem with this statement. How many people try to make their noses narrower compared to broader? How many people try to make their noses straighter compared to more hooked? How many East Asians try to make their eyes more slanted compared to less slanted? How many non-whites seek smaller cheekbones compared to larger cheekbones?
I have also not said that every man is looking for Nordic features in women. However, you can yourself see that the elite Indian women regarded as better looking than average by Indians are closer to Europeans in looks than the average Indian woman. Thus, the looks preference among your co-ethnics is shifted toward the European.
Once again, notwithstanding your delusion about the higher desirability of the darker Mediterraneo-Afghan-East Indian women, non-white men with money (Japanese businessmen, Arab Sheiks) generally seek blonde prostitutes, not South Asian or other dark prostitutes.
You wrote the following:
i feel that you are frustrated that the nordic women never come on the list of most beautiful women in the world and that they are not recognized in the international stage as the main focus is always on the women who are nonnordics and non-white.Come on accept the truth that with all that nordic facial features of ur womens they are still not that beautiful or any way near to ashwarya rai or angelina jolie or queen of jordan when it comes to beauty.
Talk about insanity! There are plenty of Nordic women who make the list of the most beautiful/attractive women in the world. It is just the case that I will not bother using these women as good examples of Nordic beauty unless they have good looking faces. Thus, I have used Charlize Theron’s face, but there have been other well-ranked Nordic women that I have not bothered to use pictures of because I am not fond of their looks: Kim Basinger, Cate Blanchett, Nicole Kidman, Kirsten Dunst, etc. Unlike some clueless people, I judge for myself and don’t believe that a woman is good looking because some high profile magazine says that she is good looking.
Posted by J Richards on May 28, 2006, 04:46 AM | #
Jim Kale,
I have not compared “pretty” women to untouchable women. The untouchable women have been shown to clarify some of the major racial elements present in India and also convey the point that the other Hindu women shown are among the better looking women in India, based on gross face shape variables.
You, too, have the brought up the issue of makeup. The Hindu women shown in the comparisons within this thread are high profile celebrities and hence have been photographed with makeup and may also have had their pictures airbrushed. However, a number of the Nordic women that I have shown are either ordinary or close, and their pictures do not feature any tricky airbrushing. For instance, some of the Nordic women shown have freckles. If I had gotten these pictures from fashion magazines, then all these freckles would have been digitally removed. Additionally, as I have said it previously, makeup does not change gross face shape variables. For instance, makeup does not make 1) a hooked nose straight in profile view, 2) thick lips look thin, 3) flared nostrils look narrow, 4) a broad nose look fine, 5) large cheekbones look small, 6) large jaws look small, etc. Thus, differences in gross face shape variables are seen between both untouchable and high caste women and either of these groups and Nordic women, though, on average, the differences between the untouchable and caste women is smaller than the difference between the caste women and Nordic women. On the other hand, some untouchable women probably look good, though it appears that good looking Indian women are more likely to come from the higher castes.
---------------------------
Tyen,
I have not misunderstood Venecan’s post. Pure-blood Dravidians? What is this supposed to mean? The reason that Dravidians are shown as part of the cluster labeled Caucasoid is that they were part of this cluster in 80% of the bootstraps but joined an Asiatic cluster in 20% of the bootstraps. Thus, for the alleles tested, the European contribution was greater in the sample than the East Asian contribution. If you read the Sahoo et al. paper above, you will note a great deal of overlap between the Y chromosomes of the caste groups and the tribals/aboriginals. Thus, imagining the Dravidians to be some kind of pure-blooded people is absurd. India as a general rule is heavily racially mixed, with aboriginal elements found in the highest castes and vice versa.
Your understanding of the Flynn effect is flawed, too. The international average rate of IQ rise in the mid-late 20th century has been 5 points per decade. And you cannot assume that none of this IQ rise has taken place in India. Black Africa has had a much worse problem with malnutrition than India, but its IQ has also increased in the 20th century. For instance the IQ of 7.5-year-old children in rural Kenya increased by 11.22 IQ points between 1984 and 1998, which works out to about an 8-point rise per decade, which is higher than the 5-point per decade international average:
Daley et al., 2003 T.C. Daley, S.E. Whaley, M.D. Sigman, M.P. Espinosa and Ch. Neumann, IQ on the rise: The Flynn Effect in rural Kenyan children, Psychological Science 14 (2003) (3), pp. 215–219.
How can you assume that no Flynn effect has been taking place in India? In the mid-20th century, India’s population increased by hundreds of millions. This increase would not have been possible without a corresponding increase in food supply, and belies any claim of large scale starvation in the country over the few decades that this large population increase has taken place. Do not forget that the Indian IQ studies likely never included the street children and tribals, and few to no untouchables. Richard Lynn adjusted data from all studies based on year of study publication, and at a standard rate, and you cannot critique him on this count. Regarding the magnitude of the increase, as the Colom et al. study shows, the spectacular increases are in the lowest IQ range. Thus, if you add 30 points to someone with an IQ of 40, you still have a mental retard. Similarly, considerable improvement in the education and nutrition of American blacks in the 20th century has done nothing to reduce the 18-point black-white IQ gap in the U.S. Once again, given the staggering gap between the brightest Indians and the brightest whites, the groups virtually unaffected by the Flynn effect, by all means this corresponds to a large, genetically determined difference between the averages of these groups.
My argument that whites are the best overall at sports is not desperate. You have chosen to focus on a handful of traits: “jump higher, stronger, faster,” and still you are wrong. If you look at “Strong man” competitions, the winners are typically white men. The top weight lifters, wrestlers, fighters (martial arts, fencing), race car drivers and fighter pilots are mostly white. If you look at the faster variable, there are two components to speed: reaction time and response time. The reaction time is slowest in blacks. Thus, in sports requiring a fast reaction time, such as table tennis, blacks do not stand a chance to compete with East Asians. Where the likes of West Africans are fast, as in sprinting, they cannot participate in endurance events and vice versa for the Kenyans, and once again, whites are second to only blacks in sprinting, second to only Kenyans/East Africans when it comes to endurance events dominated by Kenyans, and champions in other endurance events. I could go on, but here are some statistics.
In the 2004 Summer Olympic, of the 929 medals awarded, approximately 70 percent, or 650, were won by white athletes. Asian athletes won 154 medals, or 16.6 percent, while Negro athletes won 89 medals, or just 9.6 percent of the total. The rest were won by athletes from other groups.
In the 2006 Winter Olympics, of the 252 medals awarded, 228, or almost 91 percent, were won by white athletes. Asian athletes won just over 9 percent of the medals, with 23 total, and only one medal was won by a Negro. You could try to dismiss the Winter Olympics by saying that blacks either have no interest or lack opportunity, but the Summer Olympics stats speak for themselves. There are many sports that require no special equipment or expenses, but blacks just don’t have the build to emerge as top champions in these sports, e.g., cycling, bench pressing, karate, etc.
Blacks dominate only a few sports, and it is clear that whites are overall much better athletes than blacks.
Posted by Sophia on May 28, 2006, 04:36 PM | #
My husband and I were crawling the web searching for relevant information about his home-country: Denmark,Copenhagen when he came across this post. He assumed it was an out-of-date post considering the topic, but was shocked when he realized it wasn’t. He insisted I read it and thus I was inspired to write: I am an American woman, a psychiatrist, and my husband is a Dane--all 6’3, blonde blue-eyed inches of him, and our children are all grey-blue-eyed, blonde curly haired angels. My husband has always been attracted to darker (black) women--which is why he married me, and I have always beena attracted to fairer white men. My husband and I both agree that there is only ONE race (the human race obviously) and that naturally there are variations in this gene pool. However, for humans to expend this amount of time, resources, and energy to argue the fact that we ARE humans who happen to be different--thank goodness--is an embarassment. Our intellect is higher than this. Unquestionably, beauty IS and always will be in the eyes of the one(s) beholding it. There are more important issues occurring on this planet of OURS that need to be addressed, and cranial size and eyes displacement are not they. Fact is: the HUMAN race WILL continue on as it has, without your ideal-ethnologies and ethnic slurs. And a note to the creator of this post from Mr. Nielsen, 100% Nordic Dane Viking (whichever label suits your liking): I am not a seperatist. I am a man who loves a woman regardless of her ethno-genetic predominance. YOU will speak for YOURSELF and not the rest of us Nords when you make hate-filled comments and write uselessness such as this. You shame us all when you pressume to speak for a human unit on behalf of yourself! You are a coward! Stand alone if your argument has merit. It does not, which is why you post on a public forum such as this--join us in the scientific community on OUR stage! As for Malcolm A: May your marital union be blessed and write on!
Signed: Mr. and Mrs. Nielsen
Posted by DAN MOHAN on May 28, 2006, 04:45 PM | #
DEAR RICHAREDS,
I THINK NOW YOU ARE GOING VISUALLY IMPAIRED DOES ASIN HAS A FLAT NOSE BRIDGE LOOK AT HER SIDE VIEW NEAR TO A MIRROR IN THE THREAD
AND SAYING ABOUT THE NORDIC LADY NEXT TO MALLIKA YOU SAY SHE HAS FINE FEATURES COME ON MAN FINE DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE NOSE IS ALMOST VANISHING FROM THE FACE ,SHE HAS NO NOSE BRIDGE IT IS FLAT COMPARED TO OTHER NORDIC WOMEN OR ELSE SEND ME A SIDE POSE OF HER.
NOW LOOK AT THE NORDIC GIRL NEXT TO SIMRAN WITH ALL THAT NORDIC FEATURES SHE IS VERY DULL IN LOOKS COMPARED TO SIMRAN.OH GOD HOW CAN YOU SELECT SUCH PHOTOS OF WOMEN ONLY TO THE REASON THAT THEY HAVE NORDIC FEATURES SHE LOOKS LIKE A PUPPET.
NOW LOOK AT THE GIRL NEXT TO SONALI BENDRE DOES THIS NORDIC WOMEN HAS A FINE NOSE COMPARED TO THE NORDIC ONE BELOW HER OR NEXT TO ASIN. DOES THAT GIRL LOOK BETTER THAN SONALI, NO WAY,
THEN ONE MORE THING DO YOU SAY THAT ALL WOMEN WITH NORDIC FEATURES LOOK BEAUTIFUL WELL IF YOU THINK LIKE THAT I THINK YOU NEED TO DEVELOP YOUR SENSES.
THEN ABOUT ASIANS AND MUSLIM COUNTRIES DYING HAIR IT ACTUALLY LIKE ,THESE PEOPLE LIKE A LITTLE BLONE HAIR BETWEEN THE WHOLE LOT OF BLACK HAIR And IT IS NOT ONLY BLONDE HAIR DYE THESE PEOPLE USE , OTHER COLOURS ARE ALSO USED IN THE SAME RATE MAY BE MORE THAN BLONDE DYE.AS THE PEOPLE OF THESE COUNTRIES ARE NOT AWARE OF NORDIC WOMEN BECAUSE TO THESE PEOPLE , PEOPLE WHO ARE WHITE ARE THE SAME ,WHETHER NORDIC OR NOT THEY ALL ARE WHITE AND YHESE PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT MOSTLY ALL WHITE PEOPLE HAS BLONDE HAIR.SO NO QUESTION OF WANTING TO BE A NORDIC BY COLOURING BLONDE.
AS YOU WOULD KNOW THAT IN ASIAN COUNTRIES THE BLONDE HAIR IS COMMONLY SEEN IN OLD PEOPLE AS A PART OF AGEING ,I AM SURE THAT NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WOULD LIKE THEIR HAIR TO BE FULLY BLONDE
THEN ABOUT PLASTIC SURGERY WHEN AISHWARYA WON THE MISS WORLD AND SHE BECAME FAMOUS IN INDIAN CINEMA THE WOMEN FROM ASIAN COUNTRIES AND MUSLIM COUNTRIES CONSIDERED HER FEATURES AS THE PERFECTION OF BEAUTY AND ANY PLASTIC SURGEON KEEP HER FEATURES AS A CHOICE WITH MANY OTHER INDAIN STARS FOR A SURGERY TO CHANGE FEATURES.
SO IN PLATIC SURGERY IN THESE COUNTRIES THE NORDIC WOMEN FEATURES ARE NOT AT ALL CONSIDERED AS INIDAIN FILM STARS ARE IN MORE DEMAND.
Posted by EC on May 28, 2006, 07:01 PM | #
To Mr. and Mrs. Nielsen,
Your “we are all one human race” assertion is a red herring. It in no way cancels out the variations of all the different races. You two have clearly made this point indirectly by stating that Mr N loves black women and Mrs N loves fairer white men. You two have clearly set discriminating parameters in your choice of opposite sex partners and thusly have indirectly rejected the “we are all the same” liberal maxim. For if you two actually DID believe that tripe, then the likelihood that Mr N would have “settled” for a white woman and Mrs N would have settled for a black man would have been quite high.
You, Mrs N being a psychiatrist, should know better than repeating that liberal sewage considering you MUST have taken at least one or two science/biology/genetics courses prior to entering medical school, correct? Repeating lies in order to assuage public opinion in your choice of mate is disingenous at best. Tell me, why did you always favour white men over black men in mate selection? I have my suspicions on this.
And finally to Mr N, my dear man, not all of us have imbibed in the indoctrination set forth by the MTV generation and this includes many of your countrymen in Denmark. If one becomes infected with “jungle fever”, then it his choice and it is highly unfair and uncivilized to help “infect” everyone else solely for selfish reasons. You’ve made your bed my friend. Now lie in it. No need to kick and scream and show moral indignation because everyone else is not as “enlightened” as you are.
Posted by Tyen on May 28, 2006, 07:27 PM | #
J. Richards
Blacks are clearly physically superior to whites. Look at all the highest paid athletes in America. Virtually all are black and this is despite the fact that blacks are only 12% of the U.S. population, grow up with fewer opportunities, less money to buy sports equipment, worse nutrition and environment etc.
Even black Africans in starving countries outperform white countries with every advantage in many sports competetion.
Even people as politically incorrect as JP Rushton claims blacks are physically superior & claims it’s party because they have narrower hips, more fast twitching muscles, more muscle, and more testosterone.
Of course whites with a billion times more money, nutrition, and opportunity have the resources to succeed in a few sports that no one cares about, but the fact that they are absent from the most competetive and lucrative sports of all, despite all their social advantages shows that all non-Africans are genetically disadvanted physically.
And sports like race car driving and ping pong require MENTAL SPEED as much as PHYSICAL SPEED.
Now the reason why I feel Indian IQ’s should be upgraded by AT LEAST 20 points is very simple. James Flynn has documented over and over again that when countries move from rural poverty to urbanized industrialization, IQ’s especially on the Raven test, start rising by several points per decade for perhaps an entire century or more. Flynn even claims that British born in the 19th century were scoring in the 60s (much lower than Indians) on the Raven.
Now even I find those numbers a little low to believe (perhaps the Raven test is not as valid a Lynn cliams) but the point is that India is at least 100 years behind most white countries in terms of urbanization and industrialization, so comparing today’s India with today’s Britain is not a fair comparison. It makes far more sense to compare today’s Indians with Brits in the 19th century since both were afflicted by rural poverty, malnutrition, and poor schooling. Have you ever been to India and seen the masses of people? They’re mostly very short and weight less than 90 lbs. It’s completely obvious that they’re suffering from EXTREME malnutrion and are nowhere near their genetic potential. Indians raised in the west TOWER over their counterparts back home, just as whites living today TOWER over their counterparts in the 19th century, both physically and mentally.
And apart from a few trivial adjustments, Lynn himself admits that IQ’s were NOT controlled for the Flynn Effect. He clearly states that the correlation between IQ and national GDP works BOTH WAYS. That is high IQ CAUSES high GDP, but also high GDP creates better schools, better nutrition, better health care-all of which causes IQ to go up (i.e the Flynn Effect).
And I don’t care what part of the curve the Flynn Effect increase (different studies make different claims). The point is that every time mass urbanized industrialization occurs, the AVERAGE IQ score SKY ROCKETS. Why should only India be an exception to this worldwide trend?
I don’t doubt that the Flynn Effect has occured in a few scattered pockets here and there across the third world, but the VAST MAJORITY of Indians are still stunted, wasted, undereducated, unstimulated, raised by undereducated malnourished parents.
Posted by Anon on May 29, 2006, 08:37 PM | #
J Richards,
With all the evidence of there clearly being only 3 races (Mongloid, Negroid and Caucasoid) having hit you in the face, you are still arguing with your faulty claims and continue to cite your nonsense. As is evident, you are not here to understand logic. Besides, who has ever used skin color and photographs to in the studies of race determination? Craniofacial measurements are used for these studies. But then again, I don’t think morons like you can get it. As I said earlier and you deleted, you should consider yourself honored that Malcom A decided to post on this thread and share his knowledge with you. If his explanations have not been able to bring you into the light, then nothing will.
Now, as for the rest of your false claims, I will crush each one of your misconceptions below.
1. Let me clear your delusions as to who is smarter between the Asians and Whites. [Note: I am citing reliable sources like Wikipedia and not unreliable ones (majority rights and other white supremist websites) like you do for your faulty claims.] Whites are smart and there is no doubt that modern civilization can be attributed to the white race, but when it comes to intelligence, whites are certainly not smarter than Asians.
The average IQ scores of the East Asian population living in the US and in Asia are similar, and both are higher than the average IQ scores of the White population living in Europe and the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_Minority
Asian Americans on average have higher IQs than White Americans whether they live in the US or Asia.
2. As far as beauty is concerned, beauty is a subjective topic. I have already stated above that none of the “beautiful” nordics on this thread posted by you can compare to the beauty of the Indian, Southern European, Arab and Latin women. Maybe you and your friends have a preference for the pale, plain looking nordic women, but then again, you lot would have lived happier had you been born a few centuries ago.
Besides, when most men think of beautiful, sensual women, most do not think of nordic women. Instead their imaginations take them to the sun-kissed beaches of Brazil, to the mystic deserts of Arabia, to the ancient cities of India.... sorry to burst your bubble. You and your redneck friends might consider blondes beautiful… but as I mentioned earlier, we dont live in the Middle Ages anymore. Yes, majority of American women dye their hair blonde, but then again, this country is filled with dumb guys like JR who have their preferences clear. I do agree that certain blondes can be beautiful (Claudia Schiffer), but they remain few and spread far out (most are dyed blonde anyway).
Dusky beauty is what defines beauty in the 21st century. The white skinned (myself and all the women known to me included) tan ourselves to achieve that dusky brown skin tone in order to be attractive. Sweden has the highest rates of skin cancer per capita and don’t tell me that they just like to sit in the sun. They are trying to become bronzed (sadly for the Swedes, all they can get is a roasted crab look).
Although you fail to acknowledge it, Nordic women and men are a sub-race of the Caucasoids, just as the (North and South) Indians are and just as Southern Europeans are and just as most Arabs are (read Malcom’s posts and citations above using Cavalli Sforza’s studies). Therefore, my statement that the Nordics have as much in common physically with the southern Europeans as with Indians holds true.
3. With reference to your comment about race mixing, it is clearly evident that in the case of Saira, having an Indian father has given her an edge above the rest of the white women. She is the “Global Face of Beauty” because of her ethnic blood. If her mother had mated with a regular white guy, do you think Saira would be recognized for her beauty like she is presently? She’d have been another “plain jane.” Besides, Saira is an intelligent woman, not like the typical blonde bimbos. So think again before you say things like race mixing is detrimental for the white race. Our race is clearly benefiting from race mixing.
On the other hand, it is the Indians who don’t want to mix their race. Indians are known to be adamant about marrying into their own castes and backgrounds. They are least interested in mixing their blood with whites.
4. Your ignorant and vulgar comments about Lord Shiva’s representation demonstrate your appallingly low IQ which I doubt could scrape beyond 70 (so far your cut-paste “performances” have been at par with a far below-average IQ).
I have been studying Hindu Religion and Philosophy for over 8 years and I can tell you that no interbred trailer trash moron like you would EVER begin to comprehend the depth and complexity of Hinduism. It is clearly beyond you. Any explanation here would be useless as your IQ level would fall short.
5. You claimed the following:
the darker the population, the dumber it is.
And what great reliable reference have you cited? Ah, the one and only greatly reliable MR.com. HAH! JR, you freak, don’t cite if you cant back your claims up with reliable data.
Again you claimed:
the great Hindu medical system known as Ayurveda, which teaches that diseases are caused—in part—by the malevolence of female demons!”
In response to this, I will refer to my comment number 4 above.
You also claimed:
The 2006 ACM international competition for top computing prowess was dominated by white males.
You moron, the link you have cited has the names of universities in order of ranking. The site does not give any names, genetic data or racial factors as to who constituted the winning teams. Keep in mind that the smartest kids at American universities are often Indian, Chinese, and Koreans. Having pulled out of your ass your claim that the competition was dominated by white males, you are not only citing something that doesn’t exist, but also lying about the information cited. Top US universities owe their status to the fact that most Asians attend their programs while paying five to six times as much than regular Americans. Besides, American universities beg Indian students to chose them for further education by staging “educational fairs” in every Indian city to attract these bright student to their universities. They do it for three reasons:
1.Indians are the smartest students they have and form majority of the research teams at the grad level.
2.Indians have the purchasing power to send their kids to ridiculously priced educational institutions to obtain the tag of having an American degree. There are few Americans who send their kids to university paying out of state tuition. For many Indians on the other hand, it is not a big deal to pay $75,000 out of state tuition per year.
3.Finally, top US schools such as Columbia, MIT, U Penn (Wharton), U Cal Berkley etc have the rankings that they do as they have the highest number of international students, especially Asians as they are the smartest.
6. As for your example of a “good looking man,” it is nothing short of ridiculous. By posting images of “chunky monkeys” and referring to them as good looking, you are only trashing any credibility that you may have established earlier on in this post.
I will be back to continue. In the mean time, look at the following Indian women posted. The nordic women posted by you look lame in comparison. The Indians shown here have olive skin and dark features, and stand in a class of their own. And frankly, if you can pull out some good looking pictures of a nordic woman that matches up to them, then please go ahead. But if your “good looking” women resemble the clowns posted by you earlier, then its not even worth your time posting as pictures speak for themselves.
Posted by vipin thomas dan on May 30, 2006, 02:35 AM | #
dearest anon,
WOW WOW WOW UR ANSWER TO THAT OLD MINDED J.RICHARDS IS MINDBLOWING.KEEP GOING MAN YOU ROCK.
DEAR J.RICHARDS,
YOU HAVE SAID THAT
Lists of the most beautiful/sexy women in the world are typically based on the decisions of a handful of magazine editors who choose among famous women. Thus, it should not be surprising if a former Miss World and prominent Indian actress makes it in some such lists, but this does not mean that most people around the world find her attractive.
OH GOD NOW YOU ARE TRYING TO ESCAPE BY SAYING ALL THESE BASELESS POINTS THAT MAGAZINES LIKE HELLO FROM BRITISH AND TIME ARE FAKE.THE WORLD WIDE INTERNET POLLINGS Are fake.YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY OUT OF MIND.YOU HAVE TO EDUCATE YOUR SENSES LET YOUR GOD SHOW SOME MERCY UPON YOU
Posted by nirmal on May 30, 2006, 02:42 AM | #
dear J.RICHARDS,
I HAVE SEEN THIS LOT OF WHITE MONKEYS LAYING NUDE ON THE BEACHES OF ASIAN COUNTRIES LIKE INDIA AND SO MANY OTHER COUNTRIES TO TAN THEIR DIRTY PALE WHITE SKIN.THAY WANT TO LOOK DARK THAT THIER PALE DIRTY WHITE
SO J.RICHARDS IF UR ARE ALIVE GIVE AN ANSWER TO THIS
Posted by DAN MOHAN on May 30, 2006, 02:48 AM | #
dear j.richards,
check out these sites these are new fresh photos of indian women like ash and laila rouass they can beat any NORDIC WOMEN IN BEAUTY AND SEX APPEAL
http://www.bastardly.com/archives/2006/04/20/laila-rouass-hot-indian-of-the-week/
http://www.bastardly.com/archives/2006/05/24/aishwarya-rai-bastardly-sexiest-women-2006-23/
Posted by Anon on May 30, 2006, 03:35 AM | #
Dear Dan,
here are the pictures. To post images all you have to do is use the following tag:
Cheers
Posted by J Richards on May 31, 2006, 07:40 PM | #
Sophia,
You may believe that humans are not racially differentiated, but scientific evidence—cited within this thread—reveals what is obvious to the common man: the existence of races among humans. Your husband is no more a representative of Northern Europeans than I am, and I am not a self-appointed spokesperson for Northern Europeans. This entry focuses on a recently published article in a peer-reviewed journal and is of interest to some people.
Read the paper by Rhodes as to what makes faces attractive (cited previously) and see for yourself whether beauty completely lies in the eye of the beholder.
There are all kinds of issues that are worthy of discussion, and regardless of the importance of some of the issues discussed here, they need to be addressed. It is not like this entry occupies the center-stage of this site.
I don’t see how I am displaying cowardice by posting this entry in a public forum. The evidence cited within this thread by me is state-of-the-art science, but the politically sensitive issues addressed here are things that the scientific community shies away from. On the other hand, if this entry is indeed rubbish, then perhaps you and your husband could enlighten us about the misconceptions you have come across. The reason why the public is allowed to comment here is for enlightened people to correct us; so help us.
-------------------------
Dan Mohan aka Vipin aka Nirmal,
Why are you posting under different names? You need to improve your English skills and stop writing in all caps. I have not said that Asin has a flat nose bridge; I have said that she has a flatter nose bridge than the white woman she is compared to. And, where have I implied that all women with Nordic features look attractive? I have been wasting time responding to your atrocious lack of understanding of what I have written, thanks to your poor English comprehension. Godamnit, improve your English proficiency.
Anyway, your poor comments are useless to this thread. Your preferences are certainly not those of the typical white person. If you believe that the masculine Simran, the coarse-featured Sonali Bendre and the hooked-nose Aishwarya Rai are better than the Nordic women they are compared to respectively, then all I can say is that I am not surprised. The typical Hindu has simply not evolved a better aesthetic sense, which goes with his abysmally low average IQ and also explains why Hindus look the way they do.
Old people in Asia have white hair, not blond hair! And, if people in Asia think highly of the looks of Aishwarya, it is because she is much better looking than the typical South Asian.
My comment regarding the magazines naming top sexy/beautiful women does not pertain to their fakeness, but the fact is that many of these women are not attractive and some downright repulsive (e.g., Giselle Bundchen), and these lists are based on a good deal of considerations unrelated to sexiness or beauty. So referring to these lists to infer what women are considered the most attractive by the majority of people is foolish.
So you have seen a lot of white monkeys lying nude on beaches to tan their dirty pale white skin? Well, rest assured, this is not to acquire the fecal-colored skin that you and other South Asians possess. Since most jobs moved indoors, pale skin among whites has become a sign of low social status since whites who have to spend most of their time working for money will usually not get enough sun—unless they resort to tanning salons or spray-on tans—and thus be pale. Thus, tanning is popular among whites. The large number of white women tanning themselves are also disproportionately dying their hair blonde and prefer Euro-Nordic facial features. Don’t be mistaken that tanning has anything to do with a desire to have dark skin. Tanned white skin is different from naturally darker skin, and whites do not want naturally darker skin.
Posted by J Richards on May 31, 2006, 07:42 PM | #
Tyen,
Blacks are clearly physically superior to whites. Look at all the highest paid athletes in America. Virtually all are black and this is despite the fact that blacks are only 12% of the U.S. population, grow up with fewer opportunities, less money to buy sports equipment, worse nutrition and environment etc.
Americans blacks are much more obese than American whites, and they often get free food in the form of food stamps, and also by Churches and charities. So no, they have more than enough to eat. As far as opportunity and sporting equipment go, K-12 education is free in the U.S., and public schools offer plenty of sporting facilities and equipment. Once again, if you go through the contents of castefootball.us, you will encounter plenty of evidence for the special treatment of black athletes, and there are plenty of people encouraging blacks to participate in sporting activities in high school, yet they basically participate in activities that they are capable of being good at, i.e., football, basketball and some track and field events. Blacks simply do not have the build for excelling in most sports.
When you are talking about the highest paid athletes, you are obviously talking about football and basketball, but there are other sports where the best athletes make a lot of money, but blacks are uncommon among the top ranks in these sports; e.g., tennis, golf, ice hockey. You could argue that this is because of lack of opportunity, but this was true in the past and does not apply to Americans blacks today. There is also plenty of proof of anti-white discrimination in football and basketball documented at castefootball.us.
You have ignored the fact that the majority of Olympic medal winners are whites, who are less than 10% of the world’s population.
Even black Africans in starving countries outperform white countries with every advantage in many sports competetion.
This is lame. Most blacks that win Olympic medals are American blacks. Of the few African blacks who excel in the Olympics, they do so in only some events such as sprinting (West Africans) and some long distance events (Kenyans), and this is because they have the build to excel in these activities, but they simply do not have the build to excel in most sports.
Even people as politically incorrect as JP Rushton claims blacks are physically superior & claims its party because they have narrower hips, more fast twitching muscles, more muscle, and more testosterone.
You may be misquoting Rushton on the alleged physical superiority of blacks; he might have commented on the better black performance in some sports, but the important issue is not what someone says, but what proof exists out there. The fact is that a greater proportion of fast-twitch fibers means diminished endurance. Thus, West African blacks are nowhere close to being champions in sports requiring endurance. Fast-twitch fibers are also associated with large motor units, and having more of these fibers translates to less success at fine motor skills. “Strong man” competitions require a combination of great strength and endurance, a combination that favors whites, not blacks, and you should look at the weight lifting records to see whether blacks or whites dominate weight lifting. If blacks are stronger than whites, how come they don’t dominate weight lifting, something that hardly requires any expensive equipment?
The denser bones of blacks means that they cannot dominate swimming. The shorter, less powerful trunks of blacks means that they cannot dominate wrestling or bench pressing. The strength-agility-reaction time combination in blacks is such that they cannot dominate martial arts. The leg proportions of blacks, with relatively longer lower legs, means that they will not be dominating cycling. And so on; no amount of training, nutrition or good facilities is going to change this. How can you say that blacks are overall better at sports than whites? Ridiculous!
quote]Of course whites with a billion times more money, nutrition, and opportunity have the resources to succeed in a few sports that no one cares about, but the fact that they are absent from the most competetive and lucrative sports of all, despite all their social advantages shows that all non-Africans are genetically disadvanted physically.
This is an absurd statement. Whites are absent from the most competitive and lucrative sports? Have you not seen white players in the NFL and NBA (ever heard of Larry Bird, John Stockton?)?
Major League Baseball is about 60% white, 30% Hispanic, 9% black and 1% Asian. The percentage of blacks has fallen to a third of what it was 30 years ago, and I will quote the following from castefottball.us:
In football, mostly black players are recruited by the elite 1-A programs with many superb white high school players shut out, which is why blacks go on to dominate the NFL. College baseball would love to have more black players participating, but whites are dominating American baseball, to the point that well over 95 percent of the best college players are white.
However, unlike football, Major League Baseball commits huge resources to developing and signing non-American players. Scouts are sent swarming through the Dominican Republic and other hispanic baseball hotbeds, and “baseball academies” continue to be built outside the U.S.
Inside the U.S., large resources are devoted to the mostly fruitless cause of developing black American players, again with academies, as well as many inner city programs paid for by MLB. However, there are no baseball academies in mostly white areas, nor are there any special programs to develop talent in suburban areas or in poor rural areas. Baseball is the all-American game, but the powers that be, both in baseball and society in general, are interested in making it as “diverse” as possible, as they are with any sport that whites dominate.
Last I checked, Tennis and Golf, well paying at the top level, were dominated by whites.
Whites have recently taken the boxing world by storm, and three of the four top heavyweight boxing titles are currently held by white men; you better read this.
Even though blacks have some advantages in specific track and field events, whites do a better job at the decathlon. In short, the notion of black athletic superiority is complete nonsense; they only dominate a few sports.
Posted by J Richards on May 31, 2006, 07:45 PM | #
Tyen,
You need to quit harping on James Flynn. I have not disputed the Flynn effect. You want to add 20 points to the 81 average IQ to India? This would make it equal the average white IQ. Like I have pointed previously, the Flynn effect mostly occurs in the lower half of the bell curve, and the smartest people are virtually unaffected. Given the huge gap between the brightest East Indians and the brightest whites, do you want me to believe that the average differences between East Indians and whites are little to none?
You have again repeated nonsense related to the Flynn effect. You said that modern whites tower over their ancestors in height and mental capability. An increase in height of 1 SD over 50 years is not exactly towering over one’s recent ancestors. Similarly a 1 SD rise in IQ over 50 years, most of it in the lower half of the bell curve and almost no increase at the right extreme, is hardly towering over one’s recent ancestors. Stop saying that the IQ scores used by Lynn were not adjusted for the Flynn effect with reference to the date of publication/assessment; this adjustment was not possible in some cases, but India’s scores were adjusted.
Flynn claims that the British in the 19th century were scoring in the 60s with respect to IQ? This is ridiculous. There were no IQ tests back then. Besides, a massive prevalence of undernutrition will drop the average IQ of any population, but it cannot be extrapolated from the rise in IQ of white populations that other populations have the same innate intellectual capability as whites. Once again, the abysmal presence of East Indians among the top intellects, inventors and innovators in the 20th century is not compatible with the notion that the intellectual potential is the same in whites and East Indians.
I have been to India and have seen plenty of Indians there and also in the West. You are correct that Indians are shorter and much poorly built than whites. But is this evidence for massive malnutrition? Black Africa has a much greater problem with malnutrition than India does, yet West Africans have a better body build than East Indians. I have cited plenty of studies previously regarding the poor physical build of East Indians. If you go through these studies and additional references in them, you will come across some rather interesting finds. For instance, I have always found it curious that whereas East Indians are generally weakly built with respect to skeletal and muscular mass, they often have excess belly fat. I have wondered how is it possible for apparently underfed people to pack on excess belly fat. What the studies show is that East Indians are fatter than whites, i.e., their lean body mass is even lower than what appears to be the case! If you were to ask me to picture fat people, I would picture obese blacks, Polynesians and whites, not East Indians, but East Indians living in the west are among the fattest people, though they don’t look like it given their poor physical builds. Thus, the poor physical appearance of East Indians generally reflects their innate physical constitution rather than undernutrition, the exception being the minority of people who are homeless, diseased or old. Once again, widespread undernutrition culls the population, but India’s population has increased by hundreds of millions in the 20th century!
I have not said that India is somehow an exception to the Flynn effect. The reason that I cited the study from rural Africa is that if a greater-than-international-average IQ rise can be shown in rural Africa, which is worse than most of India, then it is absurd to assume that a parallel process has not taken place in India, too. The fact is that the IQs of both whites and Indians have risen, but the white-Hindu gap has remained, just as the 18-point black-white gap in IQ has remained constant in the U.S. in spite of the Flynn effect operating in both groups. You need to understand that the average IQ of a reference population is always designated 100. If this average were to rise to 105, then new norms will be proposed to designate it as 100. Thus, a 100 IQ among whites today corresponds to a higher numerical value of IQ in the recent past just as an 81 IQ in India today corresponds to a higher numerical value of IQ in India in the recent past.
The Indian IQ tests are unlikely to have recruited people affected by undernutrition, i.e., the poorest people. In fact, one of the Indian studies included by Lynn used the WISC-R, which is not something you would give to illiterates, i.e., over half of Indian children, yet it reported an average IQ of 82. Similarly, toward the end of Apartheid Africa, there was no undernutrition problem in the general public in South Africa, yet data from 1990 show an average IQ of 83 among the East Indians there (summarized by Lynn).
Posted by J Richards on May 31, 2006, 07:49 PM | #
Anon,
With all the evidence of there clearly being only 3 races (Mongloid, Negroid and Caucasoid) having hit you in the face, you are still arguing with your faulty claims and continue to cite your nonsense. As is evident, you are not here to understand logic. Besides, who has ever used skin color and photographs to in the studies of race determination? Craniofacial measurements are used for these studies. But then again, I donï¿1⁄2t think morons like you can get it. As I said earlier and you deleted, you should consider yourself honored that Malcom A decided to post on this thread and share his knowledge with you. If his explanations have not been able to bring you into the light, then nothing will.
I have not deleted any of your comments, though most people would given your obnoxious manners. This is my house and I can do what I please, but you are a guest, and it seems that you have not learned manners. Don’t falsely accuse me.
Malcolm has not presented any evidence for there only being three races among humans. There has never been any agreement in the past as to how many races existed among humans; Cavalli-Sforza himself cited racial classification attempts ranging from 3 to 200 races among humans, and demanded proof of the existence of biological races among humans in a 1997 paper (cited above). Malcolm 1) picked 19th century literature about 3 races from a Nordicist site; 2) ignored other racial classification schemes; 3) cited a dictionary; 4) ignored current genetic evidence for at least 5 races published in peer-reviewed journals; 5) Ignored craniometric evidence showing that it is not possible to classify humans into three races only or classify whites and East Indians into the same race; 6) misrepresented a prior U.S. Supreme Court decision; 7) cited some statements by Cavalli-Sforza in the 1970s whereby he used terms such as Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid without presenting evidence for only three races among humans; 8) cited a 1988 paper by Cavalli-Sforza to support his arguments even though this paper featured a genetic tree where NE Asians were clustering with the group labeled Caucasoid, not SE Asians; 9) ignored Cavalli-Sforza’s 1997 statement asking biologists who believe in race to offer genetic evidence for it, and so on. If you bring up again the notion of there being only three races among humans or that whites and East Indians belong to the same race, I will ask you to cite recent evidence from peer-reviewed journals that supports these contentions or else you will not be allowed to comment here.
As far as your crushing my arguments goes, let us see what you have attempted.
You cited literature that NE Asians have higher average IQs than whites from a reliable source, namely Wikipedia! Talk about scientific standards! I have been citing evidence from peer-reviewed journals to support my major contentions, and this is what you need to do. On the other hand, if you go though my entries and comments, I have never denied, and have acknowledged, the higher average IQ of NE Asians compared to whites. But South Asians are not NE Asians. Additionally, the brightest people are not NE Asians, but Europeans, as evidenced by Europeans producing modern civilization; winning the most Nobel Prizes and Field Medals; outcompeting NE Asians with respect to building the most technologically advanced equipment such as rockets, fighter jets, very powerful CPUs; dominating the top ranks of software coding, etc.
You have called beauty a subjective topic, but ignored the paper I cited by Rhodes regarding objective correlates of beauty. You have apparently missed the contradiction between your statement that “when most men think of beautiful, sensual women, most do not think of nordic women...” and your statement that a large number of white women dye their hair blonde because the U.S. is full of dumb people like me. So which is it? I got news for you. White women in both the U.S. and Europe overwhelmingly dye their hair blonde compared to other colors, and there are a large number of such women. They do it because they know that most white men prefer blondes. Only in your distorted mind do men around the world dream of dark Brazilian and South Asian women. White men may dream of vacationing in the sun-kissed beaches of Brazil, the mystic deserts of Arabia and the ancient cities of India, but they will almost always imagine themselves snuggled between a blonde and a redhead, not Hindus or Middle Eastern women.
You think Saira Mohan has gained an edge over other women because of race mixing? Hindus like you are so retarded that it is unbelievable. I posted a bunch of pictures of Saira Mohan within this thread and you can see that this woman is masculine and unattractive. And you need to quit pretending that you are a white man. It is telling that you Hindus feel the need to defend your arguments by portraying yourself as a white person.
You have talked about blonde bimbos and an intelligent Saira Mohan. Saira Mohan is not dumb, but whereas Northern Europeans are responsible for modern civilization, the average Hindu is a mental retard by European standards.
On the other hand, it is the Indians who don’t want to mix their race. Indians are known to be adamant about marrying into their own castes and backgrounds. They are least interested in mixing their blood with whites.
The Indians who are adamant about marrying into their own castes and backgrounds have so extensively mixed with each other that the genetic distance between the untouchables and tribals on the one hand and the caste groups on the other hand is miniscule and a small fraction of the large genetic distance between the caste groups and Western Europeans; see the evidence by Bamshad et al. in their paper on women stratifying Hindu castes and the Sahoo et al. paper. Besides, Al Ross previously mentioned the Devadasi system in India. This is a disgusting form of temple prostitution in Southern India whereby upper caste men have sex with untouchable women. So much for Hindus avoiding other castes! And as far as Indians not wanting to mix their blood with whites goes, tell that to the white women that have been pestered and harassed by East Indian men.
Posted by J Richards on May 31, 2006, 07:51 PM | #
Anon,
Regarding my comment about Lord Shiva’s representation and the Ayurveda system, instead of mentioning the philosophical high points of the penis worship and citing the proven medical benefits of Ayurvedic medicine, you have called my comments ignorant and vulgar, and described me as a sub-70 IQ inbred trailer trash moron. Some great defense of the high points of Hindu beliefs!
I have not studied Hinduism like you have for 8 years, but I took plenty of religion classes when I was a student and came close to having a religion minor. Thus, it is not that I am clueless about Hinduism, but speaking of its philosophy, some of it is Aryan, not indigenous to the dark natives of India, and the actual beliefs and practices of the dark natives are atrocious. Shiva is a black-skinned indigenous god. You could not have missed references to how much the Aryans despised the black natives of India for, among other things, being penis worshippers. The beliefs associated with Lord Shiva are incredible, and a small sampler is documented below.
ORIGIN OF HOLY SHIV LINGAM (Lord Shiva’s penis)
Lord Siva seduces the Pine Forest sages’ wives and is cursed for this immoral behavior. Origin of the holy Linga which is commonly worshipped in Hindu temples:
“When the sages saw Siva naked and excited they beat him and they said, ‘Tear out your linga.’ The great yogi said to them, ‘I will do it, if you hate my linga’, and he tore it out and vanished.”—Kurma Purana 2:38:39-41; cf. Haracaritacintamani 10:74; Yagisvaramahatmya 26a. 14.
In another version, the sages in the forest quote the legal texts regarding the penalty for seducing a guru’s wife when they punish Siva:
“You false ascetic, let your (Siva’s) linga fall to earth here. A shameless and evil man who has seduced another man’s wife should be castrated; there is no other punishment ever. A man who has seduced his guru’s wife should cut off the linga and testicles himself and hold them in his hands and walk until he dies.”—Siva Purana, Dharmasamhita 10:187-90; cf. B. K. Sarkar, pp.234-5.
MORE ON ORIGIN OF HOLY SHIV LINGAM
Here is another origin of the holy Linga:
“… He (Siva) agreed to this and laughed, for he was secretly amused, and he said to Brahma, ‘There is no good use for this linga except for the creation of progeny.’ And as he said this he broke it off and threw it upon the surface of the earth. The linga broke through the earth down to the subterranean hell and went to the very sky. Visnu sought the end of it below, and Brahma flew upwards, but they did not find the end of it, for all their vital effort. Then a voice arose out of the sky as the two of them sat there, and it said, ‘If the linga of the god with braided hair is worshipped, it will certainly grant all desires that are longed for in the heart.’ When Brahma and Visnu heard this, they and all the divinities worshipped the linga with devotion, with their hearts set upon Rudra (Siva).”—Siva Purana, Dharmasamhita 49:23b-46, 74-86.
LORD SHIVA’s CHILDREN
The elephant-headed God Ganesha is the son of Shiva. Here is how Ganesha was born:“When Siva and Parvati were making love together, Visnu took the form of a Brahmin with matted locks, oppressed by thirst, and he went to the bedroom door and said, ‘What are you doing, Siva? Arise and give me food and water, for I am an old man oppressed by thirst.’ Siva arose, and his seed fell on the bed instead of in the womb of his wife. Then Siva and Parvati offered the Brahmin food and water, and he vanished and took the form of a child and went to Parvati’s bed. There he became mixed with the seed of Siva that was on the bed, and he was born like an engendered child. Parvati found the child and nursed him, naming him Ganesa.”—Brahmavaivarta Purana 3:8:19-33, 83-8, 3:9:1-26.
Lord Shiva even managed to accidentally chop off the head of his son, Ganesha, and remorseful of his deed, he decided to compensate by affixing the head of the first being that he came cross, which happened to be an elephant, and this is how Ganesha got the head of an elephant.
Some additional examples of Shiva’s children:
“When the gods interrupted Siva and Parvati, two sons were born of drops of Siva’s seed. These sons were then posted at the door to prevent further interruptions while Siva made love to Parvati, having promised the gods that he would not spill his seed in her. One day Parvati came out of the bedroom in great dishabille, half naked, her breasts scored with teeth marks. The two sons chanced to see her like that, and they were upset, but Parvati became angry and said, ‘Why have you looked at me when I was not in a state to be seen by anyone but my husband? You should have closed your eyes. Since you have done this immoral thing, you will be reborn as mortal men with the faces of monkeys.’ Then they were miserable and protested that it was her fault for having come out so suddenly, and they cursed her to become a mortal queen (Taravati) and Siva to be her husband (Candrasekhara) so that they themselves might be born again as their sons, Vetala and Bhairava.”—Siva Purana 3:21:1-8; Kalika Purana 49:1-92, 50:1-64, 51:1-60, 52:1-155, 53:1-217.
More here.
The philosophical underpinnings of Shiva beliefs speak for themselves.
Posted by J Richards on May 31, 2006, 07:55 PM | #
Anon,
Regarding my statement that the darker the population, the dumber it is, you wrote:
And what great reliable reference have you cited? Ah, the one and only greatly reliable MR.com. HAH! JR, you freak, don’t cite if you cant back your claims up with reliable data.
You ignoramus, I did cite my own entry at MR, but all the data were presented from a recently published paper in a peer-reviewed journal. I even offered the pdf file of the paper, and the citation is:
Donald I. Templer and Hiroko Arikawa. Temperature, skin color, per capita income, and IQ: An international perspective. Intelligence, Volume 34, Issue 2, March-April 2006, Pages 121-139.
Regarding the ACM 2006 competition and topcoder data, you wrote, and I will be addressing it line by line:
You moron, the link you have cited has the names of universities in order of ranking. The site does not give any names, genetic data or racial factors as to who constituted the winning teams. Keep in mind that the smartest kids at American universities are often Indian, Chinese, and Koreans. Having pulled out of your ass your claim that the competition was dominated by white males, you are not only citing something that doesn’t exist, but also lying about the information cited.
Your piss-poor investigation is remarkable. The top 10 teams in the 2006 ACM competition, in order, were: 1) Saratov State University, 2) Jagiellonian University – Krakow, 3) Altai State Technical University, 4) University of Twente, 5) Shanghai Jiao Tong University, 6) St. Petersburg State University, 7) Warsaw University, 8) Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 9) Moscow State University, 10) Ufa State Technical University of Aviation
As you can see, the Western Universities, except MIT, are from non-English-speaking nations that have few non-whites. If you looked around, you would find the following names of the participants (you can search for their pictures if you like):
Saratov State University - Michael Mirzayanov, Igor Kulkin, Ivan Romanov, Roman Alekseenkov.
Jagiellonian University (Krakow) - Pawel Idziak, Arkadiusz Pawlik, Bartosz Walczak, Pawel Walter.
Altai State Technical University - Elena Kryuchkova, Coach; Artur Mogozov, Dmitry Gozman, Roman Gomenjuk.
University of Twente – Eljakim Schrijvers, Boris de Wilde, Erik-Jan Krijgsman, Kamiel Cornelissen.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University - Yong Yu, Bohai Yang, Chang Liu, Yuan Lin.
St. Petersburg State University – Andrew Lopatin, Gleb Leonov, Sergey Bankevich, Vitaliy Valtman.
Warsaw University – Jan Madey, Bartek Romañski, Marcin Michalski, Pawel Parys.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology – Martin Rinard, Heng Ping Nabil Christopher Moh, Hubert Hwang, Velin Tzanov.
Moscow State University - Eugueny Pankratiev, Andrey Khalyavin, Andrey Rumyantsev, Ivan Popelyshev.
Ufa State Technical University of Aviation - Alexander Fridlyand, Alexey Zhevak, Denis Nazarov, Konstantin German.
Thus, in the top 10 teams, out of a total of 40 individuals, 34 were white, 6 NE Asian and 0 South Asian. Whites clearly dominated, and considerably so if you consider their much smaller population size compared to East and South Asians.
Similarly, it is unlikely that you will bother to look up the topcoder.com data, but of the 20 top coders at the time of this writing, 18 are white, 2 NE Asian and 0 South Asian. The NE Asians were ranked 12th and 14th, and the white males were overwhelmingly Northern European types; there were no Southern Europeans.
I suppose I should also mention the data from the ACM software system award, the highest award for the most outstanding innovations in computing. From 1983 to 2005, of the 63 people awarded, 58 were white males, 4 were NE Asians and 1 was South Asian.
Top US universities owe their status to the fact that most Asians attend their programs while paying five to six times as much than regular Americans.
Finally, top US schools such as Columbia, MIT, U Penn (Wharton), U Cal Berkley etc have the rankings that they do as they have the highest number of international students, especially Asians as they are the smartest.
Talk about ignorance! Top U.S. schools established themselves as World Class Universities much before the 1960s immigration reform that flooded the U.S. with non-whites, and this achievement of high status had nothing to do with Asians. Asians are the smartest? The only smart Asian populations are the NE Asians, and you can see that they are notably underrepresented in the top ACM rankings, the top topcoder.com rankings, Nobel Prize winners, Field Medalists, etc.
Besides, American universities beg Indian students to chose them for further education by staging “educational fairs” in every Indian city to attract these bright student to their universities. They do it for three reasons:
1.Indians are the smartest students they have and form majority of the research teams at the grad level.
2.Indians have the purchasing power to send their kids to ridiculously priced educational institutions to obtain the tag of having an American degree. There are few Americans who send their kids to university paying out of state tuition. For many Indians on the other hand, it is not a big deal to pay $75,000 out of state tuition per year.
Indians the smartest students? No team from India was present among the ranked in the 2006 ACM competition, no team from India is among the top 20 Universities at topcoder.com at present, only one of the 63 awardees of the ACM software system award till 2005 has been an Indian, Indians have only won 3 Nobel Prizes in science and no Field Medals, etc. Besides, some Indians may have decent purchasing power in the U.S., but only a miniscule number of them do so in their homeland.
The facts speak for themselves. Whites dominate the ranks of the brightest people; NE Asians are a distant second, and south Asians have such a low presence among the brightest that their presence can be treated as a rare aberration.
In summary, any reasonable person can see how effectively you have demolished my arguments, and I definitely recommend that you click on the link posted by Dhruv Mehta.
As far as the pictures you have hotlinked go, I am pleased to see you argue on my behalf. Even though parts of the face are hidden by hair in several of your pictures, the looks of these women are seen for what they are. Almost no white male would give them a second look. Besides, you have posted a small picture of Aishwarya Rai and a picture of Saira Mohan, completely oblivious to the fact that several clear and multi-angle pictures of these unattractive women have been shown within this thread previously, but what would retards like you be expected to do?
Dan Mohan mentioned Laila Rouass, a woman that does not look Indian, and it turns out she is half Moroccan. Both of her pictures that you hotlinked show the sides of her face covered by hair, but I didn’t have to search much to find a picture that shows her face outline more clearly, and she is hardly a woman that would turn the heads of white males.
Posted by Guessedworker on May 31, 2006, 08:55 PM | #
Perhaps 339 posts is enough for one thread, JR, and you should construct a new post for your critics to dash their brains against.
Posted by DAN MOHAN on June 01, 2006, 03:28 AM | #
dear J.RIchards
as you said
My comment regarding the magazines naming top sexy/beautiful women does not pertain to their fakeness, but the fact is that many of these women are not attractive and some downright repulsive (e.g., Giselle Bundchen), and these lists are based on a good deal of considerations unrelated to sexiness or beauty. So referring to these lists to infer what women are considered the most attractive by the majority of people is foolish.
Why you want beauty to be described in your own terms,you call a large majority of the population on earth fools (including many whites) because their taste is different from yours.beauty concepts differ from person to person and from nation to nation . asian countries ,muslim countries even UK, extending to cape town africa fall in for indian beauties because of bollywood .In these countries many bollywood films fare well than hollywood. Now it is usual that hollywood directors come knocking the doors of bollywood beauties, many indain film actress turn down these offers due to over body exposure and sex scenes.Bollywood films keep coming up in the Uk top 10 films .you dont find aishwarya beautiful but there are millons or billions around that world that find her beautiful.Reports says that she has the largest fan base in the world taking into consideration that for a long time she has acted only in bollywood films now that hollywood directors are behind her for signing movies and she is to sure to top hollywood
There is no particular standards for beauty and facial features so most beautiful will be the one that appeals to many.Anyway the asian countries ,muslim countries are not concerned about nordic beauties and many of these people find them ugly and tooo pale dead white
Posted by DAN MOHAN on June 01, 2006, 06:35 PM | #
Dear j.Richards,
None of the Nordic women in this thread look better than aishwarya rai or sonali or bipasha basu. Some of the Nordic women in this thread are head to toe ugly I will show you out specifically the ugliest ones
1.the Nordic women next to simran, okay i agree that simran looks manly in this photo( i have seen her in real life she looks better than this and womenly) but what about the nordic one she looks like ugly puppet worse than simran.i think this nordic women will be ab lack mark on ur self.
2 now the women next to sonali see that marks on her nose and that two nose holes are standing far away fom each other i dont think that she will attract any white or non white man in this world she is ugly.sonali is thousand times better
3now the women next to mallika (i dont like mallika) but the nordic women next to her does she have a nose ,is this what you call a fine feature is.oh god .now you compare the nose of this Nordic women to the Nordic women next to asin(not asin’s nose) and do u find any difference
4the women next to urmila you said that this nordic women is not ur favourite okay she has good figure but she looks damn ugly and does not come anywhere near the beauty and sex appeal of urmila.
now you must check out the figures of indian women like SHILPA SHETTY ,shamita shetty thier figures can beat any nordic women you have posted above but they look only average even the nordic women that you have shown with the best figures are not good looking.
Posted by C. M. on June 02, 2006, 09:16 AM | #
dan mohan
Nordic women are so called “ugly” in the eyes of the hindu, but why can’t white women who travel alone pass through India without being sexually assaulted or harassed by brownies.
Of course these women are naieve but you better stay with your dirty hands off from them!
You are out of your retarded mind to think that your ugly country men don’t find blonde women attractive.
You hindus are inferior and you better stay away from our women!
Posted by anjali on June 02, 2006, 01:52 PM | #
“You are out of your retarded mind to think that your ugly country men don’t find blonde women attractive.”
Actually u kno CM ure right...our men do find these nordic women attractive...their most attractive quality however is the fact that they are “easy”...thats why all the boys love em...town bicycles is what they are reffered to as...haha
PS...i am not a hindu...sorry what?!?!
“Damn! I told you that I did not want this thread to digress into a who-has-the ugliest-women contest.”
You did that a long time ago...Damn!!!
“I am sick of having to deal with Aishwarya Rai. I don’t know what is up with you Hindus; what do you see in her?”
The high cheekbones, the cut jaw, the high arch in the brow, the perfectly symmetrical almond eyes...let me reiterate...i am not a hindu
“The rightmost picture is that of an older (30s), fatter Charlize without makeup, and with corrugated brows and lighting that makes her upper nose look pinched.”
pinched nose!! is that what natural sunlight does to her nose?? poor soul…
“it is clear that Aishwarya has a broader face, more massive cheekbones and more massive jaws.”
“MASSIVE”...you love that word dont ya??? as far as i kno most people find high cheekbones attractive...thats why women pump them with collagen and use all sorts of makeup techniques to define their cheekbones....High cheekbones, for vague reasons, have the flavor of aristocratic beauty…
“Besides, if Aishwarya were walking at the beach in a bikini with the flabby physique she presented at the 2004 Cannes Film Festival, I’d bet her physique would look a lot worse than the physique of Charlize in the paparazzi pictures.
In other words, if you match Charlize and Aishwarya with respect to age and presence/absence of makeup, Charlize will beat Aishwarya hands down.”
Aishwarya did look pretty flabby at cannes in ‘04, she was told to gain 20 pounds for Bride and Prejudice a movie she shot during that year...however she looked pretty buff and at cannes 2005...and at least her looks havent started deteriorating...too bad we cant say the same for charlize
Southern European women are closer to Northern European women in facial features than Indian women, on average, including upper caste Indian women.
sorry, but the majority of southern european women, especially the italians and greeks have the hooked nose u seem to detest...and lots of indians i know guys and girls alike get asked if they are greek or italian…
“the darker the population, the dumber it is”
hahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhhahahahahahahahahahahahaha
if this statement holds true then u JR must be a black mutha posting under the alias of JR....ive got one thing to say to you...be proud of your dark skin JR
“The evidence cited within this thread by me is state-of-the-art science”
hahahahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahaha
Ure a joke u black mutha
“You need to improve your English skills and stop writing in all caps. I have been wasting time responding to your atrocious lack of understanding of what I have written, thanks to your poor English comprehension. Godamnit, improve your English proficiency.”
Erhh...when ure english is perfect, then ull have every right to start berating others for their poor grasp of the english language...this works on the same principle of “those of you who are free of sine may cast the fisrt stone”.
Anyway, your poor comments are useless to this thread. The typical Hindu has simply not evolved a better aesthetic sense.”
The rest of the world seems to appreciate our tastes...the taj mahal (moghul architecture) for example...one of the seven wonders of the modern world, along with the great pyramid of giza (middle eastern), great wall of china (asian) are all exapmles of awesome
craftsmanship by the people of their countries respecitvely.
“Laila Rouass, a woman that does not look Indian”
WTF??? what does she look like then chinese? nordic? hah!! she looks everybit indian to me…
Anways this forum/thread/blog whateva it is has become more boring than bat shit...ill go bak to staring at the walls, it was much more interesting...what happened to Malcolm A??
PS...Anon and others i wouldnt bother posting any more pictures...we all know that JR prefers ugly fat viking mammas and cavewomen to beautiful women
Posted by C. M. on June 02, 2006, 02:41 PM | #
You hindus are very funny, you claim children of foreigners as your own, this Leila Rouass is half or full maroccan, Katrina Kalf sounds very indian to me as is Dino Morea.
Now the darker the dumber, it is simply true. Just look at what countries are doing fine, the countries with the best infrastructures, economies, science etc.
About your comment of white women “being easy”, what can a backpacker girl do when she’s being assaulted by filthy hindus, victims of rape are always easy. Just admit that hindus are a bunch of filthy niggers
Posted by C. M. on June 02, 2006, 03:14 PM | #
Hindus and blacks are ugly niggers just being pushed by jewish media.
Posted by Nikhil Sheth on June 02, 2006, 06:41 PM | #
Malcolm, J. Richards - you are probably one of the most pathetic human beings to ever exist.
The fact that you can pick apart Aishwarya Rai’s irrefutable beauty just to reconcile yourself that “whites are superior in beauty” makes me want be sick all over your face.
Talking of IQ levels. India was granted independance merely 50 years ago. I’m sure America and the European countries were probably as screwed up in terms of literacy levels, IQ scores just as India is at the moment. (which btw is not as bad as you have made out).
The amount of Indian celebrities people say “do not look indian”! You’re proving my very point! hahaha. The sheer diversity of Indians! - Nordic people can be beautiful - I am not saying that is not true - what i am saying is that you are probably more limited in the way they look than Indians!
Indians may not have blonde people, but we have brown hair and black hair. Indians may not have as many people with light eyes as Nordics do - but you do not have as many people with dark eyes. It works vice versa.
In the U.k. i see so many adverts for spray on tans, tanning creams, tanning bed shops.
The western world is filled with much more vanity about looks than the rest of the World and that is a fact. So many celebrities undergo plastic surgery here it is laughable. You see them on interviews talking about it as easily as though they were plannign which pretentious and overpriced restaurant they would eat at next.
If Nordic, Caucasoid people are so beautiful why undergo so much plastic surgery???
Why do so many whtie celebrities wear enhancer contact lenses, or colored contact lenses or in photoshoots have their eyes “blued up” as it were.
The very first picture posted in the whole of this page is of one of the most average, skimpy and prissy looking women I have ever seen. I am baffled as to how such light hair and such light skin, and such light eyes is an attractive combination.
The indians we have posted here represent a very sizeable chunk of the Indians that live in India and around the world. They have variations int he way they look, darker hair, lighter eyes, lighter skin, darker skin.
It’s funny that you say Aishwarya has a ugly nose or she has massive jaws (the most untrue statement i’ve ever heard of anyone). The fact is that she is so beautiful I could break down into tears just looking at her. She in some ways goes against every single notion that plastic surgeons, modelling agencies and hollywood put out as the ideal.
The problem is here that you are fixed upon what physical characteristics are attractive and what aren’t attractive. It’s about how it all comes together.
If we take a simple look at age - by the time a nordic women is of the age of 30 she will begin to be developing wrinkles. You have absolutely no melanin in your skin, eyes or hair. You are vulnerable to disease, to the UV rays of the sun. An indian woman on the other hand will usually not experience significant wrinklage until the age of 40+ (and that is an underestimate) - one of my friend’s mother’s is 49, wears no makeup and she still has no wrinkles. She is Indian - actually one of the lightest indian women I have seen. Doesn’t this prove my point in whole.
Africans and Indians will sustain their looks much easier - nto having to resort to cosmetic surgery to possess more ‘cat like features’ and fewer wrinkles. For you nordic, your “beauty” (Because you are SOO BEAUTIFUL i mean wow, those freckles, that blotchyness, pastyness, i mean those prissy looking lips, that ghostly yellow hair) is temporary and no doubt couldn’t last more than one day in the Indian sun.
Posted by HC on June 03, 2006, 01:52 AM | #
Brunette women from Norway and Sweden are by far the most beautiful in the world, especially when they have a tan. Indian women are in general way too hairy and have ugly legs.
Posted by HC on June 03, 2006, 02:22 AM | #
In South Africa bc of the great climate and year round sunshine, european caucasoids have the most attractive skin tones - a lovely bronzed colour, whereas Indians and Blacks go too dark. Which is probably why all the rape cases are non-white on white. I have known many Nordics, who while normally quite pasty, when they live in a tropical climate go a lovely brown colour.
Some South African beauties:
file:///Users/hadcle00/Desktop/tp.jpg
file:///Users/hadcle00/Desktop/tp2.jpg
file:///Users/hadcle00/Desktop/roxyingram.jpg
file:///Users/hadcle00/Desktop/Indian.jpg
Posted by HC on June 03, 2006, 02:24 AM | #
ok let me try those images again
Posted by dan mohan on June 03, 2006, 04:38 AM | #
hello C.M,
you said that a lot of white women is raped in india .i will now educate you in this case
these white women are real big fools they walk on the streets of india at mid night as it is thier own country and they are raped by the low class street men.they wear such dresseses to reveal whatever they can and these low class street roudies who dont even get achance to even glimpse a women from a good indian family as the women from high indian families and middle class families are very very beautiful and are not seen roaming the street at night like these white women, the roudies find a way to fulfill thier desire
most of these white women just move in the night alone and it is well know that in india only prostiutes move alone on the streets at night after 12pm and and are easily trapped and raped by these low class beggars of the street.
the high class indian families and middle classes indian families keep themselfs away from the these street beggars and women here do not wear revealing dresses on the street and do not go alone in night.
the white women with thier pea nut brains no doubt cannot think better when they are in different situation because these white women are brought with modern facilities all the time with so many machines to aid them all the time that thier brains work rarely and when it works the indicator is always at zero so it never works
so the incidence of white women being raped in india is not at all related to the high class and middle classes indian men
you look into the cases of these white women being raped it is mostly by low class people like the autoricksaw drivers,,street roudies and the sewage cleaners and beggars. The high class and middle class indian men are not involved in this at all.
so please educate your white women to use their senses and brain when they are outside there country .your cahances of failure in educating then will be 100% failure.
Posted by Buster on June 03, 2006, 06:13 AM | #
Its not because of their peanut brains. Its because of their goodness and naivety. White women cannot comprehend the destruction and violence that men of other races are capable of, until ofcourse, they experience it.
Posted by C. M. on June 03, 2006, 10:12 AM | #
“you look into the cases of these white women being raped it is mostly by low class people like the autoricksaw drivers,,street roudies and the sewage cleaners and beggars. The high class and middle class indian men are not involved in this at all.”
You tell that to the Swiss woman of 40 who worked at the embassy in your filthy country. She was carjacked by a bunch of upper caste hindu men, one who drove her car and the other was raping her in the back of the car.
Of course she never wants to go back to your horrible country.
You are a bunch of filthy niggers and rapists, the gang rape reveals your middle eastern roots of upper caste hindus.
Gang rape is typical of middle easterners and niggers. Of course middle easterners are sandniggers too because they have also black admixture.
Jewish media should stop pretending that filthy india is a good tourists destination while it’s a horrible third world country. Maybe the jews can promote india so their own women do backpacking vacations there and end up with a bunch of hairy moneys all over them.
If it was up to me I would freaking carpet bomb india.
Posted by C. M. on June 03, 2006, 10:18 AM | #
There is something else:
If the jews are so convinced of mix relations I would believe it if Gwynyth Paltrow married a nigger and have nigger children. But for some reason I just don’t think so. They would not jeopardize their carefully acquired European looks after their 1500 years stay in Europe when they entered Europe they looked like a bunch of middle easterners.
So jews must stop pushing the kind of James Blake and the ugly Saira Mohan.
Posted by DAN MOHAN on June 03, 2006, 06:22 PM | #
hello C.M,
The 40 year old white women was raped by the two middle aged low class people these guys are not from the high class hindu families .You cannot even read a news well.
Okay you say that we hindus are niggers and rapist then why your white womens keep coming to India in large number. Then stop these white pea nut brains from coming to India. Whatever happends even if they are raped or ripped of everything these white women flock in large numbers to India and that to many come lonely I think these white women love themselfs being sexually assulated and raped by Indian men. any way they make every thing easy for the low class Indian men(street ruodies, beggars ,sweeper class , rikshaw drivers) to rape them. These white women wear such small dresses whatever their age is, so no problem of riping or tearing of their clothes for the rapist and that too walk lonely in the streets and sea shores at night making every possibility of them being raped. These white women are allergic to dress and cannot bear on their body beyond the two piece dress.
The incidence of these white women being raped fall small in number when compared to the number of white women who actually go to bed with the low class Indian men on their trip to India. It is fact in many hotspot tourist sites In India, it Is common to see white women going hand in hand with the local class people mostly the guys in their 20’s to 30’s.It is a shame these white women select theses fruit venders ,ferrymen and other low class maggots to spend their night with. So when these white women get raped it is her own mistake they do not have a brain to think of in a situation. Theses white women befriends any guy who pours a laugh upon them.I have seen a lot of these white women going around with the local guys that we don’t even like to be near with. Oh god put some sense into their heads. Your women are dumbos
Posted by DAN MOHAN on June 03, 2006, 06:36 PM | #
Dear JR,
you said
Dan Mohan mentioned Laila Rouass, a woman that does not look Indian, and it turns out she is half Moroccan.
What man what she looks like to you,ya she is half morrocan but she has all the typicl indian features long nose ,black eyes,black hair,her skin tone.She looks every bit indian.You are totally out of mind now, i doubted it but i am now sure
Posted by you are all hate filled bastards on June 04, 2006, 09:06 AM | #
“If it was up to me I would freaking carpet bomb india.”
Shows your small mind. You white trash morons obsessed with your ugly race should try to get some knowledge and read some books. You are only wasting your time in rebuttling India and Indians because sooner or later, you will be at her mercy.
Posted by Guessedworker on June 04, 2006, 09:49 AM | #
Gentlemen,
We have a rule here. We address one another with civility. No one is faultless in that regard, and I too have slipped into the vernacular more than once. But I much prefer to read a thread filled with sound argument, eloquently put - and I assume that is your preference, too. Please raise your game if you wish to comment at MR.
Thanks.
Posted by dan mohan on June 05, 2006, 07:03 AM | #
hello J.Richards,
i am sending you this photo of a south indian women ,she is a bollywood actress she is very very beautiful ,she has this innocent look and a specially gifted beauty i dont think none of the women(indain or white) in the thread has this divine look of innocence , calm and beauty
Posted by dan mohan on June 05, 2006, 07:14 AM | #
J,Richards,
here are some more photos of vidya balan
http://www.hamaraphotos.com/vidya_balan_1073_9.html
http://www.hamaraphotos.com/vidya_balan_1073_9.html
http://www.apunkachoice.com/people/act780/vidya_balan-stills1.html
Posted by Dan's Mohannis on June 05, 2006, 08:06 AM | #
ok, seriously, how do you post pictures on this forum?
Posted by IndianGirl on June 06, 2006, 08:56 AM | #
Dan,
You post pictures by using putting
Just put the IMG tags around the link.
Anyways, I’m amazed at how this thread is still going. May I ask the OP why you specifically chose to do a detailed analysis on Indian females? Why not East Asian, SE Asian, blacks or non-whites in general?
Here are some pictures of Parveen Babi. She’s dead. Her dad is from the Western state of Gujarat. Her mom is also Indian, but I don’t know which ethnicity she belongs to.
Posted by IndianGirl on June 06, 2006, 09:17 AM | #
Lastly, Indians who raise their kids in developed countries often see their children grow up to be a good foot taller than they are. If Western nutrition can raise their height by as much as 4 SD, it can raise their IQ’s by as much as 60 points.
LOL, my mom grew up in India and I grew up in America. I’m still shorter than her. 
Height can vary, and can be a result of any factor. I still know a lot of short Indian-American second-generationers, even when they do have a good diet.
Some Indians get their height from their family genes. I know it may be hard to believe for you, but it can happen. My brothers are 6’4, because my grandad and my uncles were over 6 ft. Yes, my grand-dad and my brother are vegetarians.
Based on my observation ONLY- Rajput Hindus, UP/Haryanavi/Rajasthani Hindu Jat community, Balochis, Sikh Jatts, and Malu Nairs tend to be tall and built on average (in comparison to other South Asian communities). I’m mainly talking about the males, not the females.
Posted by IndianGirl on June 06, 2006, 09:33 AM | #
Just to let you know, the communities that I mentioned are actually a minority in the West, in regards to the South Asian diaspora. Only certain South Asian groups and castes are dominant in the West. That’s why many Westerners aren’t exposed to the diversity of South Asians, and give in to the fallacy that South Asians are supposed to only look a certain way.
The majority of the communities that I mentioned reside in South Asia, and you would have to go there to see what they look like.
Posted by Lurker on June 06, 2006, 10:41 AM | #
IndianGirl - which group/caste are you talking about? I take it you are a member of this group/caste?
Posted by Al Ross on June 06, 2006, 11:24 AM | #
In order to understand the Indian mentality, members of civilisation must consider the actions of a devotee of the goddess Kali. He carefully removes individual lice from his matted filthy hair with the utmost care lest he inadvertently ends the precious life of his parasites, then joins his fellow Thugee cult members in the murder of humans who have been befriended for the sole purpose of human sacrifice.
Posted by IndianGirl on June 06, 2006, 10:47 PM | #
Lurker,
I was talking about the ones I mentioned in my early posts.
The Rajputs, the Balochis, the Sikh Jatts (not all Sikhs are Jatts), and the UP/Harayanavi/Rajasthani Jats (Hindu community not to be confused with Sikhs).
I guarantee you that most second-generation Indians have never heard of Rajputs, Balochis or Jats. Why? Because, most of them are in India and they make up a greater proportion of the army.
Posted by BRUNETTE FAN on June 07, 2006, 05:53 PM | #
FUCK THE BLONDES, MARRY THE BRUNETTES.
Posted by Amy on June 07, 2006, 08:16 PM | #
Well, well…
I was absolutely shocked when I read this paper that someone so ignorant could just go right out and say blonde and white women are way more attractive than non-whites. I strongly disagree and I just think that Peter Frost and this whole paper sounds like Hitler to me. Example of naturally gorgeous non-whites compared to the majority of mankind: Halle Berry is a naturally gorgeous african-american girl.
That is just one example. There are plenty, I mean plenty of people who are non-white that look better than some who are white. It has nothing to do with your race. Dark hair is beautiful when it is thick, shiny, clean, and rich, and full. This goes the same for someone who is a darker complexion. Either you got it or you don’t, and you flaunt it; it has nothing to do with your skin color.
Posted by Sacul on June 08, 2006, 10:03 PM | #
The fact of the matter is attractiveness is based on preference. Whoever posted this thread obviously thinks that nordic women are the most attractive woemn in the world, and thats fine (and obviously this individual is a cacausian, probably nordic male). I know a dozen black guys that would entirely disagree with this argument, and make claim that black women are the most attractive. I know another dozen East asians that would claim east asians are the most attractive, and the same goes for middle eastern/south asians.
Trying to use science to prove your point is entirely pointless for science has yet to, and never will be able to map put and explain the complexety of the human mind and the thoughts and emotions therein. And considering what sort of individuals people are attracted to is steeped within human emotion, your argument is entirely flawed.
The only ‘scientific’ method of studying this subject should be that of statistics. And considering Europeans (furthermore Nordic Europeans) make up only a small portion of the worlds population, and regions such as China (with 1/6 of the worlds population) and India (again 1/6 of the worlds population) contain the highest population densities in the world, it is hard to imagine that Nordic women would be considered the most beautiful women in the world from a statistical perspective. (considering most indians and chinese are most likely attracted to their own kind of people).
To conclude I am cacuasian, and I am most often attracted to European women, and find myself not so attracted to people of colour. This doesnt mean that European women are the most beautiful women in the world, even though they may be in my opinion. Whoever wrote this thread needs to get out of their sheltered bubbled life, and realize there is an entire world outside of America. If you want to claim Nordic women are the most beautiful in the world, thats cool, but you dont have to demean other races, and attempt to prove that your perspective is scientifically sound.... because it isnt
Posted by C. M. on June 09, 2006, 12:56 PM | #
To dan the dandnigger mohan
Huh so called “two middle age lower caste men"did the rape of the Swiss 36 year old woman.
http://www.countercurrents.org/gen-wadhwa221003.htm
read this moron, it’s clearly that only upper caste men can speak English in filthy india.
Posted by C. M. on June 09, 2006, 01:07 PM | #
dan sandnigger mohan, this is your callsign.
“it Is common to see white women going hand in hand with the local class people mostly the guys in their 20’s to 30’s”
You are talking about 50+ white woman from countries like Germany, right?
Tell me what’s up with you hindus into older women?
The two upper caste rapists in their early twenties raping a 36 year old mother of ? children, but because of their upper caste background they are of course being protected by the india police. One of the Dutch politicians who visited india called india “india is zo corrupt als de neten” a translation is something like"everybody in india is corrupt like hell”.
Posted by C. M. on June 09, 2006, 01:11 PM | #
you know those 50+ women also go to countries in Africa like Gabon, I saw it on the German television once. Disgusting.
But of course these women will not “score” any young male in their homecountry so…
Besides only hippies or backpackers visit india, the number of europeans visiting india is neglicible. Only the hippies in Goa or the bakpackers who wants to save money go to india.
Posted by dan mohan on June 10, 2006, 05:56 AM | #
C.M,
You people are brought up like this calling vulgur words,this shows your dirty filthy culture and how people treat each other and how parents grow up thier children..and in your country you dont say rape is not common.you have send me a news of october 22 2003 oh poor man you did not come to know the follow up of the case after 1 year and 2 months the two men were later caught and identified by police one of them who spoke english is a man from lower caste and it is nothing new that a man from lower caste can speak english ,speaking fluent english does not mean that the person is from upper classs and the other person who knows only hindi is still from a even lower class
The case went unfiled and the two rapist eascaped as the women involed in it did not turn up again.
you said only 50+ women are seen with guys here so sorry many of these white women who come to india are young between 20 to 30years. now a large number of white women from europe and USA flock to india.india comes in 5th in the hot tourist spots in global scenary and that to because all these white keep coming up here
http://www.turnkeysoftwareprojects.com/top-destinations.html
in 2000 - 2006 it is seen that many europeans come to india and actually many and many of them settle here in different jobs for a period of 1 year but they tend to stay longer and many of these europerans never leave ,this one below is one example of the many and by BBC news so that you can believe it
Posted by Anon on June 12, 2006, 11:11 AM | #
You rednecks should stop your petty minded racist discussions and wake up. Islam is knocking at our door. Learn the facts about Islam. Visit http://www.faithfreedom.org
Unless we spread awareness and stop being politically correct, we cannot eradicate this canerous disease in the name of religion. The answer is staring us in the face.
Please read this website and forward it to all your friends and loved ones. Specially make all Muslims read it. An example of what our free democracies can end up like:
Posted by Malcolm A on June 12, 2006, 05:07 PM | #
Hi JR
Malcolm has not presented any evidence for there only being three races among humans. There has never been any agreement in the past as to how many races existed among humans; Cavalli-Sforza himself cited racial classification attempts ranging from 3 to 200 races among humans, and demanded proof of the existence of biological races among humans in a 1997 paper (cited above). Malcolm 1) picked 19th century literature about 3 races from a Nordicist site; 2) ignored other racial classification schemes; 3) cited a dictionary; 4) ignored current genetic evidence for at least 5 races published in peer-reviewed journals; 5) Ignored craniometric evidence showing that it is not possible to classify humans into three races only or classify whites and East Indians into the same race; 6) misrepresented a prior U.S. Supreme Court decision; 7) cited some statements by Cavalli-Sforza in the 1970s whereby he used terms such as Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid without presenting evidence for only three races among humans; 8) cited a 1988 paper by Cavalli-Sforza to support his arguments even though this paper featured a genetic tree where NE Asians were clustering with the group labeled Caucasoid, not SE Asians; 9) ignored Cavalli-Sforza’s 1997 statement asking biologists who believe in race to offer genetic evidence for it, and so on. If you bring up again the notion of there being only three races among humans or that whites and East Indians belong to the same race, I will ask you to cite recent evidence from peer-reviewed journals that supports these contentions or else you will not be allowed to comment here
I have no interest in replying to your nonsense, which is quite clearly a waste my time. I happened to return to this “trash’ thread after some time, and see that you are still villifying me.
My only counter to all this nonsense you have written about me, as quoted above, is that YOU ARE NOT A SCIENTIST ( by your own admission ) and hence NOT QUALIFIED TO DEBATE OR SPEAK ON THIS MATTER using SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTS.
I hope you won’t hide behind your cowardly DELETE button and show some GUTS by posting this reply which is only defending my name, which you seem to be freely using when I am not here to defend it !! Otherwise stop using my name.
Posted by dan mohan on June 15, 2006, 03:05 AM | #
this thread is a waste filled with ugly nordic women who Jr says to be the best are not even good to be compared with the beautiful indian women
Posted by Sigurd on June 15, 2006, 04:54 AM | #
There is a type of face, perhaps not unbearable, though certainly not beautiful, and because of this holding the promise of sex and sex with a certain, shall we say, gratitude. Non-whites have this face by definition and in decedent ages, when society has lost any sense of proper sexual mores (those that produce good breeding) and sex merely for whimsical gratification predominates, such a face may even become attractive as the goal is no longer breeding but easy sex with a grateful partner. The appreciation of facial beauty becomes refined in the relatively non-degenerate society, when producing offspring is regarded an obvious duty.
Posted by Malcolm A on June 15, 2006, 12:53 PM | #
There is a type of face, perhaps not unbearable, though certainly not beautiful, and because of this holding the promise of sex and sex with a certain, shall we say, gratitude. Non-whites have this face by definition and in decedent ages, when society has lost any sense of proper sexual mores (those that produce good breeding) and sex merely for whimsical gratification predominates, such a face may even become attractive as the goal is no longer breeding but easy sex with a grateful partner. The appreciation of facial beauty becomes refined in the relatively non-degenerate society, when producing offspring is regarded an obvious duty
Why write gobbledygook to hide the obvious. Speak for yourself.
Most who say Indians are good looking are Non-Indians of Western origins. ( News magazines like Hello, Vogue, and celebrities like Julia Roberts, Lapierre etc )
Posted by Guessedworker on June 15, 2006, 02:50 PM | #
Malcom,
Despite my occasional but, I would have thought, quite plain efforts to open your politically darkened eyes you still don’t seem capable of understanding that MultiCult, feel-good liberals and ethnically-aware Jews run the media, and set themselves up as the judges of Western female beauty. They are utterly unreliable and care only for their ever so anti-racist reputations in the case of liberals and ethnic advancement over the corpse of Western Man in the case of Jews. Now, is that perfectly clear? Please don’t repeat the same falsehood again.
Posted by Malcolm A on June 15, 2006, 04:11 PM | #
You are scary ....Just kidding.
Posted by Malcolm A on June 15, 2006, 05:29 PM | #
Hi Guessed Worker
You are scary ....Just kidding.
Apart from my above quoted attempt at humor, felt that a brief clarification is in order, in regards to your statement, quoted below..
Now, is that perfectly clear? Please don’t repeat the same falsehood again.
Falsehood = lie.
As Julia Roberts, Dominique Lapierre , HELLO, VOGUE etc., are all on public record , it is obvious that I did NOT lie. (ie: make something up ).
My rationale as to ‘why they said what they said’ is obviously different from your rationale ( ie; U seem to think it’s a jewsih conspiracy that makes westerners say Indians are good looking ! ----BTW Wouldn’t Jews be bound to say Jewish women, instead of Indian women, are the best looking ? ). BUT I did NOT utter a falsehood. So, please don’t accuse me of uttering falsehoods. Not my style.
I did not intend to get dragged into this thread yet again, until I noticed that JR has been using my name very freely after using the DELETE button to suppress all opposing views !!!.
Cheers.
Posted by Sigurd on June 15, 2006, 06:39 PM | #
Malcolm,
Why get angry to hide the obvious. Speak for yourself (and that great horde of non-whites salivating over white features whilst unable to admit to themselves what this implies.)
Posted by Guessedworker on June 15, 2006, 09:56 PM | #
Don’t know or care what your style is. Anyway, the falsehood you have retailed throughout this thread is that the liberal opinion on race which permeates the mainstream media is representative of something more than itself, ie it is a reliable and objective assessor of, for example, Western female beauty. Self-evidently, it is not. Your entire argument has no legs.
Posted by Malcolm A on June 16, 2006, 03:14 PM | #
Hi guessed worker
Don’t know or care what your style is. Anyway, the falsehood you have retailed throughout this thread is that the liberal opinion on race which permeates the mainstream media is representative of something more than itself, ie it is a reliable and objective assessor of, for example, Western female beauty. Self-evidently, it is not. Your entire argument has no legs.
What you state here is an OPINION not a TRUTH or FALSEHOOD. Same for me .
Hi Sigurd
Malcolm,
Why get angry to hide the obvious. Speak for yourself (and that great horde of non-whites salivating over white features whilst unable to admit to themselves what this implies.)
I am not a NON WHITE. The issue is NOT what you are referring to BUT why are non nordics winning more beauty pageants these days, which is the OBVIOUS that I am referring to. Maybe U should read the whole thread.
Cheers
Posted by Mera nam choot on June 17, 2006, 11:45 AM | #
Must see this, this is funny. Even the Pakistanis consider the Indians as monkeys. They compare the photos of random Indians and Pakis and you can see thier claim to being more attractiveness is due to their more Europeanlike look.
http://www.afghansolidarity.com/forum/index.php?&act=ST&f=3&t=1300
Posted by jasmine on June 17, 2006, 04:41 PM | #
The fact is that u people cant digest the fact that indians are the most beautiful people in the world… what u call a hooked nose and whatever… they are the sharp feautures of indians… not blurred like most of the ..... whatever ethnicity girls..... U PEOPLE ARE DEPRIEVED OF THICK AND BLACK ATTRACTIVE EYEBROWS 
.... THATS THE DRAWBACK… U GET THAT??????????????????? SORRY FOR ALL THE LOSERS WHO ARE TRYING TO CONVINCE THEMSELVES THAT THEIR RACE IS THE BEST OF ALL!!!!!!! BOOOOOO.......
Posted by Guessedworker on June 17, 2006, 07:03 PM | #
Malcom,
The liberal nature and Jewish ownership of mainstream media is NOT an opinion. You are simply wrong, my friend, to rely upon such destructive voices.
Jasmine,
You simply can’t digest the meaning of this post - which is not, as JR said, about who has the ugliest women. Try to think more politically.
Posted by hmmm. on June 17, 2006, 08:41 PM | #
Guessedworker, as the founder of this blog - I’d advise you to go through this thread when you have ample time and read the comments - particularly those contributed by MR participants.
Reflect on the language, the tone, the arguments, and the overall contribution of this post/thread to your blog.
Do read the comments first. All of them.
Posted by odin on June 17, 2006, 09:45 PM | #
Interesting Stuff. I don’t think blonde hair comes from sexual selection though. During the ice ages humans in cold environments could not farm so were hunters. If you look at the predators in the arctic circle like the polar bear or the white fox you will see their hair is light. This is because the light hair provides a hunting advantage as they do not stick out so much against a mostly white background.
Posted by odin on June 17, 2006, 09:47 PM | #
As mentioned men are ruddier and women fairer. This means men generally see white nordic woman as more feminine, and woman see ‘dark and handsome’ as more masculine. Just seeing this you can see ‘diversity’ will be a disaster. What it will actually do is destroy humans diversity by mixing us all together. As mentioned on this thread, I too almost always find it is Jewish people who are promoting immigration or race-mixing, and likely most are them are smart enough to see they are purposely causing the destruction of the white race. An all white school or town is thought to be a horrible thing and they work hard to bus or move minorities into the area.
I too find a lot of Indian, Middle Eastern, and African woman to be sort of manly looking (expecially if they are really hairy), and being closer to Africa they may have more testestorone(see Prof. Rushton) and actually are more manly. This difference though is unfortunate for white men for we have evolved skills that make us superior in warfare or in one on one battles to the death, and I believe we are more honorable men, yet woman can sense higher testestorone levels in darker males and are attracted to it due to an ancient evolutionary instinct. And why are American woman becoming so manly? Is it due to the mixing of races or of cultures? It is beyond feminism, they are getting tattoos, talking vulgar, certain female sports you can see it the most where they look and talk like men.
Everything is averages though and probably most people go against the norm. I think the Indian girls posted were very pretty, and so were the nordic girls but I don’t think they were the best lookers we have. But on average nordic woman are far better looking (Indians you should not hate us for this fact, and you can disagree with it too). Sweden is only around 8 million population, finland 5 mil, and norway 4. India has a billion. They should far more beautiful woman. The scandinavian countries have let in about 10% people of another race, I completly agree what they are doing is going to be a genocide of the nordic genome. Europe and America are becoming like India, a mix of races. Not to say that will not produce beautiful woman but they will all be mixed eventually. I think woman of all races are beautiful. Thats why humans should stay separate. Whether you believe God made us different for a reason, or that we evolved different, either way you should appreciate the diversity the human race has, and seek to help preserve this diversity. I am not saying race mixing is wrong, but there should be areas where each race can have to themselves, as well as areas for the multi-cultural societies we all know and love (or hate).
Posted by Nikhil Sheth on June 17, 2006, 10:12 PM | #
This whole post is a sham
NOthing but pictures vs other pictures with a comment from the idiot known as ‘Malcolm’ claiming more ‘refined features’ - no explanation - just “uhh yess.. here you can see more refined features”. shut up you moron.
Why is plastic surgery so common in the WEST? Because vanity is everywhere. You have your pin ups of Angelina Jolie - who btw is czech, french and iroquis indian - and you group her as one of your own merely through the fact that she is “white”???
In fact other beauties such as Jessica Alba are of mixed race as well.
A discussion should involve some element of fact. There is no fact in this. Just opinion after opinion. personally I rate Aishwara the most beautiful woman atm in the world.This does NOT mean that she is! Neither does it mean man-cat Angelina is the most beautiful because a few magasines and polls put her on top. Especially when you can actually she that she has refined her nose in surgery. Especially when you can see what she/(they all) look like without their makeup - pretty AVERAGE.
The thing is - with all these cosmetic enhancements I think people forget that there is nobody who is 100% perfect in their looks - and there never will be. The media has created a level of attractiveness that cannot be matched up to by anyone without the help of the hollywood treatment - surgery, hair extensions/pieces, makeup, hair dyes, coloured contacts etc. etc.
i don’t how anybody can add anything more to this pathetic conversation in which some deluded person is intent upon reinforcing white supremacy on us.
Posted by Sigurd on June 18, 2006, 05:18 AM | #
Malcolm,
If you don’t believe in the social and geographic separation of whites from non-whites (which I suspect you don’t) then you don’t believe in the continuance and survival of the white race. Therefore in what regard are you white? And if you’re not white, well then naturally you’re a non-white.
And a very insincere apology for not being familiar with every inane word you’ve posted on this thread. Though you should remember it was you who attacked my comments which were never intended as a rejoinder to anything you had said but rather simply comments directed toward the general theme of the thread. I hadn’t read one of your comments prior to posting and now that I’ve learned you’re a pro-mixing non-white I’ve made a mental note not to read any in the future.
Please don’t take it personally, but you see, for some reason, while contemplating solutions for white survival, the things that pro-mixing non-whites like you have to say don’t seem terribly relevant. Though perhaps I can recommend the comment board at American Renaissance as it seems there is a loyal group of white nationalists who never grow tired of the rather rote exercise of exposing all the obvious delusions, double standards, and hypocrisies of their opponents.
I think you’ll find it especially rewarding: the perfect place for “whites” like yourself to go to show their Multicultural piety and gloat about Multiculturalism’s ascendancy and invincibility in the face of “evil bigots.” “It creates the most beautiful women in the world” you could argue “Just look at the recent pageant winners…proof, proof, proof.” And then maybe you could see about being a judge for one of these pageants. We’re certain you’d have all the right things to say in the interview.
Though it seems you’ve also found some playmates here. That they feel it useful even to write three words refuting you is beyond my understanding.
Posted by Malcolm A on June 18, 2006, 05:46 PM | #
Hi Guessed Worker
.Malcom,
The liberal nature and Jewish ownership of mainstream media is NOT an opinion. You are simply wrong, my friend, to rely upon such destructive voices
Even the above quote, is your opinion, which is neither a truth nor a falsehood.
Hi Sigurd
Malcolm,
If you don’t believe in the social and geographic separation of whites from non-whites (which I suspect you don’t) then you don’t believe in the continuance and survival of the white race.
White race is threatened. By whom ? I dont see Osama or the Chinese posing any serious threat to the white race for another 200 to 300 years !. This is just a ‘scare’story invented by supremacists like you who looking for a ‘cause’ for a lack of better things to do..
If our race was in serious danger I would be the first to defend it
Hi Mera Naam
Must see this, this is funny. Even the Pakistanis consider the Indians as monkeys. They compare the photos of random Indians and Pakis and you can see thier claim to being more attractiveness is due to their more Europeanlike look.
Maybe the Pakistanis should take a good look at Musharaff !!
So Pakistanis are different from Indians ? I dont think so !
Pakistan is mainly Indians who emigrated during partition + a few pathans etc..Most muslims in the Indian sub continent were low caste riffraff Hindus who converted to escape the caste system.
You should visit Indian sites to see what Indians call Pakis ! Pakistanis can’t win a beauty pageant to save their life, because of their social backwardness and coarse facial features unlike the more refined and classy Indian elite women .
That Muslim Pakistanis hate India and Indians is a well known fact, which is just a part of Islamic jealousy of Hindu India who beat them in 3 wars etc & leaving them in the dust in technology.....
No one here is arguing that Indians (or Pakistanis for that matter ) are European like. Just that they classify together biologically as close sub-groups belonging to the same race.
Posted by Malcolm A on June 18, 2006, 06:11 PM | #
Hi Guessed Wroker
In regards to your statements about the liberal media and jewish interests etc., whether I believe the liberal media OR not is irrelevant. The important thing is what is the TRUTH. Well, obviously you believe the TRUTH is something other than what I believe in. Does that mean I am somehow against my race. I dont think so.
WHY ?
I dont think a tiny matter like beauty can threaten the survival of any race. What threatens race is racial/religious prejudice. Are Muslims all of one race ?NO ! Are they attacking eachother and threatening eachother’s survival? YES. Did whites fight eachother and threaten eachothers survival ? YES ( WW I and II)
Therefore, when it comes to survival it is neither race nor religion that matters , but individuals who believe that THEY ARE THREATENED and want to preempt.
Posted by Sigurd on June 18, 2006, 07:16 PM | #
“This is just a ‘scare’story invented by supremacists like you who looking for a ‘cause’ for a lack of better things to do.. “
Where have I indicated I am a supremacist? In some ways European man is less fit than the other races. His present dilemma illustrates this. Particularly the tendency of some of its members to retreat into denial when things are at their most dangerous and the descent of our race most obvious and even convince themselves that things have never been better (nor the women more beautiful.) I also would never deny “having a cause” (and, indeed, there are a lack of better things to do) but you on the other hand may even be unaware you have a cause.
Simply because your beginning premise has been handed to you as the “truth” and you’ve accepted it as such, doesn’t mean that it wasn’t someone’s “cause”. Are we to believe whereas we have an “agenda” your concern is simply truth? We are awed, indeed, by your “nobility.” Boas smiles down on you and guides you in your pursuit of truth against those deceiving ones with “agendas.”
Though you seem at least clear headed enough to admit to yourself that whatever the truth is, believing what I believe and saying as much, would not help you much in your chosen profession. Is this your hidden “cause”? Or is it really as you say, you would be the FIRST to sacrifice for the benefit of your race. You’ll have to please excuse that sound of incredulous laughter. “Warrior of your race” is a bit of a stretch after what you’ve written. Though as Zeppelin says (and caring little as to what they meant): There’s still time to change the road you’re on.
Posted by JB on June 19, 2006, 03:57 AM | #
J Richards:
Here is a guy, 7 inches taller and a 100 pounds heavier than James Blake, and he easily beats Blake in the looks department and everything else.
those bodybuilders look sick and unhealthy.
Amy:
Example of naturally gorgeous non-whites compared to the majority of mankind: Halle Berry is a naturally gorgeous african-american girl. That is just one example.
an example of a half-white woman combined with hollywoodian rhinoplasty
Anon:
You rednecks should stop your petty minded racist discussions and wake up. Islam is knocking at our door. Learn the facts about Islam. Visit
Visit: http://www.dieforisraelyoustupidgoyim.org
Anon:
Unless we spread awareness and stop being politically correct, we cannot eradicate this canerous disease in the name of religion. The answer is staring us in the face.
Please read this website and forward it to all your friends and loved ones. Specially make all Muslims read it. An example of what our free democracies can end up like
the problem isn’t islam it is us. Their presence among us is a symptom. Our minds have been poisoned by the mass media and the government’s schools. If we still had a collective racial conscience there wouldn’t be millions of arabs living in our lands.
Malcolm A:
My only counter to all this nonsense you have written about me, as quoted above, is that YOU ARE NOT A SCIENTIST ( by your own admission ) and hence NOT QUALIFIED TO DEBATE OR SPEAK ON THIS MATTER using SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENTS.
YOU ARE USING CAPITAL LETTERS TO MAKE A POINT and this point is a fallacy to begin with.
John Jay Ray is a social scientist with a PhD and I don’t see what makes him special or credible. Albert Jacquard is a anarchist who became a geneticist and he’s a believer in Equality of the ‘everyone is born equal’ type so he’s full of s--t despite having one or two degrees in genetics.
Malcolm A:
Falsehood = lie.
a lie is a falsehood told by someone who knows he’s not telling the truth. You could tell falsehoods which you think are true and that wouldn’t make you a liar. Being married to an indian woman this could influence you to the point of telling pro-indian falsehoods and still honestly thinking you are right.
Malcolm A:
White race is threatened. By whom ? I dont see Osama or the Chinese posing any serious threat to the white race for another 200 to 300 years !. This is just a ‘scare’story invented by supremacists like you who looking for a ‘cause’ for a lack of better things to do..
whites should be a minority in the USA in 50 years or so. And Clinton was very happy to tell that to a cheering University of Oregon audience. Same in Canada according to Paul Fromm. In England a hundred years perhaps. In France maybe 70-80. In what used to be our cities we are already minorities. It’s only going to get worse and worse unless whites overthrow the regimes that are killing them.
Malcolm A:
If our race was in serious danger I would be the first to defend it
says the so-called white guy who married a non-european woman
Posted by IndianGirl on June 19, 2006, 06:38 AM | #
WHoever said Indians were “weak” earlier-
Do you know who this man is?
DALIP SINGH aka The Great Khali
He is the tallest wrestler in WWE, and is one of the biggest bodybuilders in the world. He comes from the state of Himachal Pradesh. Some people claim that he’s Sikh, but he prays to Hindu Gods and got married in a Hindu ceremony. Don’t forget that Singh is also a Hindu last name, so he might be Hindu.
Posted by Guessedworker on June 19, 2006, 09:23 AM | #
That’s the effect of the needle, Indian Girl. On this website was you should be able to see what is possible with strict adherence to current dietary and training regimens, and NO drugs.
It is a matter of public record that India, despite its population size, is almost invisible in high impact sports achievement. I am sure there are several areas of human endeavour in which Indian males have excelled, but power-based sport is definitely not one of them.
Is it fair, then, to draw a conclusion from that about the genetic qualities of the population? Well, let’s look at the one sport - not really high impact, which all India loves: cricket. There can be no cultural explanation for the fact that India does not and never has dominated world cricket. Today, with a population of a billion it is not within any distance of that. Neither is Pakistan, with a population, I suppose, in excess of 130 million, though it has come closer.
Yet the West Indies (an equally poor but, on a global scale, tiny society) Australia, with just 20 million, and apartheid South Africa (ie the Anglos there) have commanded the stage magnificently.
I don’t think it is unreasonable to question the athletic qualties of the Indian population. It is for Indians to answer on the sports field, if they can.
Posted by IndianGirl on June 19, 2006, 01:26 PM | #
Dalip Singh had a grandfather, who was also close to 7 ft tall.
As far as sports are concerned, it’s important to remember that most Indian parents stress on academic endeavors and want their kids to pursue academic-related careers. Sports careers and other careers related to the entertainment industry are frowned upon, and anyone who chooses that route over academics will be seen as a failure or “just not smart enough.”
At one point, even going into Bollywood was almost seen as being a “prostitute.” Some of the most famous Indian actresses are rumored to be former prostitutes, children of prostitutes, or girls who came from poor, low-class families.
That’s another reason why you don’t see few Indian females in the Western media. Most Indian families in America wouldn’t let their daughters get into that kind of business, even if their daughter got offered too.
Posted by Malcolm A on June 19, 2006, 03:26 PM | #
Hi Sigurd
.Though you seem at least clear headed enough to admit to yourself that whatever the truth is, believing what I believe and saying as much, would not help you much in your chosen profession. Is this your hidden “cause”? Or is it really as you say, you would be the FIRST to sacrifice for the benefit of your race. You’ll have to please excuse that sound of incredulous laughter. “Warrior of your race” is a bit of a stretch after what you’ve written. Though as Zeppelin says (and caring little as to what they meant): There’s still time to change the road you’re on
White race will never be threatened. WHY ? Because numbers dont count. Quality over quantity !!
I dont see a time when all whites will be mixed ? Will never happen. Biologically impossible.
So relax !!
HI JB
says the so-called white guy who married a non-european woman
Hey, I was also married to a lily white woman and have a lily white kid ! Marriage 1 wasn’t as happy as mariage 2 though .
whites should be a minority in the USA in 50 years or so
Numbers don’t count. S. Africa was run by a few whites ( a minority). Did they feel threatened ? I don’t think so.
John Jay Ray is a social scientist with a PhD and I don’t see what makes him special or credible. Albert Jacquard is a anarchist who became a geneticist and he’s a believer in Equality of the ‘everyone is born equal’ type so he’s full of s--t despite having one or two degrees in genetics.
Silly. If you needed brain surgery would you select a highschool drop-out, a qualified civil engineer or a qualified, expereinced brain surgeon ?
Highschool drop out = J Richards
Civil engineer = John J Ray
Brain Surgeon = Malcolm A
Why, because we are discussing Biology and I am a qualified Biologist ( Believe it or not !)
a lie is a falsehood told by someone who knows he’s not telling the truth. You could tell falsehoods which you think are true and that wouldn’t make you a liar
This is again a matter of opinion ( in this case your opinion ). AND an opinion is neither a truth nor a falsehood in anyway.
Posted by Sigurd on June 20, 2006, 08:52 PM | #
“White race will never be threatened. WHY ? Because numbers dont count. Quality over quantity !!”
In what condition will they exist? In what condition do they now exist? As guilt-cowed, disempowered, second class citizens LEGALLY less entitled to the jobs of their own country than invading non-whites and whites living abroad? Without rights as a people, without a culture or in any case a proud culture? As whiggers? As a dwindling, infertile economic elite that has no loyalty to country, nation, culture or folk of any qualitative beauty, intelligence or strength, but instead must, in the most disheartening and dishonest manner, grovel before, lick the boots of and especially promote the lowest elements of the society in order to remain in power? As a people that worships money alone whatever the cost? This is appealing to you?
It seems to me that as their quantity dwindles their quality does as well. The health and freedom of my people are my concern as well as their existence and clearly, to any free thinking individual who has the slightest sense of fairness, decency and baring this, even a “sense of aesthetic”, this is no way to live.
Of course, given the weak health of whites as a people, naturally it follows that their very existence is also in peril. To degenerate means to die to grow unhealthy. Whoever denies that white race has degenerated does deserve to be called sane. We know that other races, sub races and even whole species have passed from the stage of history, why would we doubt this possibility when it comes to our own race, particularly as it occurs before our own eyes?
But like you I don’t believe our race will pass. I think it will prevail but certainly not by the help of people who are too cowardly to admit the potential terminality of their illness so as to be rendered unable to take steps to reverse it. As I have said, by no useful definition are you white whatever the biological reality. In fact your mimicry of us makes you far worse, makes it possible for less brave or less intelligent whites to be deluded by you.
Are you an example of the quality that you speak of? Do the traits: courage, nobility and honesty (especially honesty with oneself however terrible the truth) also figure into your definition of quality?
Posted by Sigurd on June 20, 2006, 08:59 PM | #
To degenerate means to die, to grow unhealthy. Whoever denies that the white race has degenerated does NOT deserve to be called sane.
Sorry about typos.
Posted by Malcolm A on June 25, 2006, 03:54 PM | #
It seems to me that as their quantity dwindles their quality does as well. The health and freedom of my people are my concern as well as their existence and clearly, to any free thinking individual who has the slightest sense of fairness, decency and baring this, even a “sense of aesthetic”, this is no way to live.
Of course, given the weak health of whites as a people, naturally it follows that their very existence is also in peril. To degenerate means to die to grow unhealthy. Whoever denies that white race has degenerated does deserve to be called sane. We know that other races, sub races and even whole species have passed from the stage of history, why would we doubt this possibility when it comes to our own race, particularly as it occurs before our own eyes
This is an unscientific observation. Less numbers dont mean less healthy or die out. (re : my example of South Africa during apartheid )
?Are you an example of the quality that you speak of? Do the traits: courage, nobility and honesty (especially honesty with oneself however terrible the truth) also figure into your definition of quality
These traits are individual traits not racial attributes.
Are you saying Hitler was a good example of courage, nobility and honesty How about Alfonse Capone or Rcihard Nixon, OR Christine Wheeler ?
Relax. Your own fear mongering is getting to you.
Posted by Nikhil Sheth on June 25, 2006, 07:19 PM | #
Aishwarya and Angelina are the most beautiful women in the world.
Aishwarya is not white. Angelina is of Czech, French, and Iroquis Indian Descent - she is mixed race. Jessica Alba too is of mixed race.
Why is it that blondes rarely win these most beautiful women polls.
How can you therefore state the white nordic race is superior in looks to other ‘races’ if the most beautiful women in the world are of mixed race or just a completely non-white race? Adriana Lima too is of Brazilian descent!
J.Richards and Malcolm (same person!): you are insane, pathetic and probably one of the most ignorant creatures that ever existed on this earth since you had the audacity to write this pile of garbage. It makes me feel physically ill to know that people like you exist.
It’s funny you say that blondes such as “Scarlett Johanson” are so beautiful - yet the have to use and endorse tanning cream products to make their skin more brown to actually look half decent. As well as all that makeup!
WOW
You are just a fool aren’t you?! haha
Posted by Sigurd on June 26, 2006, 02:25 AM | #
“This is an unscientific observation. Less numbers dont mean less healthy or die out. (re : my example of South Africa during apartheid )”
It’s an entirely scientific observation. When animal species dwindle in the wild, it represents a decline in the species health. What else could it indicate? Your example of South Africa during apartheid, whatever it is, is not a sound example.
Generally, relatively high fertility whites colonized non-white territories, dominated and controlled the native population. Now the reverse is occurring: high fertility non-whites are colonizing white territories and dominating them politically and culturally.
Politically, rigorously enforced taboos are placed on any criticism of non-whites, and non-whites are encouraged to organize for their own interests, while whites are forbidden from doing so. Culturally, their garbage culture and its dysgenic consequences are foisted on the host culture.
I think the onus is on you to provide examples as to how whites are healthier or of higher quality now, then in former days. Otherwise we should assume you forfeit this point.
“These traits are individual traits not racial attributes.”
Whether they are racial traits or individual traits is not the point. These traits are in decline among all races. They reappear in traditional societies which by definition are opposed to the sort of senseless racial admixture and bad breeding occurring in modern Western societies.
“Relax. Your own fear mongering is getting to you.”
This is an unhelpful, snide and insulting remark. I could just as easily point out that it is your side of the debate, that’s engaged in fear mongering, by continually insinuating that any re-assertion of genuine pride in European heritage (thus also the desire to continue it) is tantamount to the rise of a genocidal dictator and a third world war. For example, by say slipping Hitler into the conversation.
Has your own fear mongering gotten to you? See it’s a stupid remark. It lends nothing to the debate.
Posted by mikka on June 26, 2006, 02:22 PM | #
i read a lot of shit what is considered from a truly scientist on this page. the more i read, the less i got interested by the question what s the relation of ethnicity and beauty, but instead i more and more got catched by the psychological background of that people who vainly praise “nordic features” in this topic.
i would like to know the origins of your mimicry of scientific evaluations.
Posted by Malcolm A on June 30, 2006, 02:29 PM | #
It’s an entirely scientific observation. When animal species dwindle in the wild, it represents a decline in the species health. What else could it indicate? Your example of South Africa during apartheid, whatever it is, is not a sound example.
You are NOT a scientist and this statement proves it.
Humans are not subject to the same evolutionary stresses that animals are subjected to in the jungle. Humans are part of an artificial society . Hence social Darwinism, Social Biology etc..
Generally, relatively high fertility whites colonized non-white territories, dominated and controlled the native population. Now the reverse is occurring: high fertility non-whites are colonizing white territories and dominating them politically and culturally.
Yet Another ignorant statement . How do you know that whites who colonized nonwhites were “relatively high fertility”
India, China etc., were always more populated than white countires ( so much for your high fertility theory )
Politically, rigorously enforced taboos are placed on any criticism of non-whites, and non-whites are encouraged to organize for their own interests, while whites are forbidden from doing so. Culturally, their garbage culture and its dysgenic consequences are foisted on the host culture.
Taboos maybe placed, BUT don’t mean they are being followed. Birth control is rigorously imposed in China etc too. That is a universal ting. BUt no one is following them . Not enforced.
[quoteI think the onus is on you to provide examples as to how whites are healthier or of higher quality now, then in former days. Otherwise we should assume you forfeit this point
Whites are the same as before. Evolution takes thousands of years. So it is upto you to justify your theory that they are low fertility now. You proposed it. Not I.
“Relax. Your own fear mongering is getting to you.”
This is an unhelpful, snide and insulting remark. I could just as easily point out that it is your side of the debate, that’s engaged in fear mongering, by continually insinuating that any re-assertion of genuine pride in European heritage (thus also the desire to continue it) is tantamount to the rise of a genocidal dictator and a third world war. For example, by say slipping Hitler into the conversation.
Has your own fear mongering gotten to you? See it’s a stupid remark. It lends nothing to the debate.
You are the one demeaning whites ( saying they are being endangered, less fertile, less healthy, less competitive etc.., w/out supporting data). That is FEAR MONGERING .
I didn’t start the FEAR MONGERING. You did. SO stupid is as stupid does.
Posted by Guessedworker on June 30, 2006, 09:08 PM | #
Malcolm,
What is your ethnic interest in this discussion?
You call yourself a scientist and you appear to believe that science is some kind of ultimate truth, without which deliberative grace all else is illusion. This is not a fit foundation for serious debate. It leads you to ascribe too much importance to your own opinions and not enough to others.
Fertility can be read as birth-rate or as ease of conception. The former is well below replacement, the latter has been troubling scientists - real ones - for at least a decade. What are you denying, exactly?
The post-war alien influx into the West is a disaster for us. Physical dispossession and the permanent harm of miscegenation (which is your life-choice, I understand) are terrible problems which we must find a way to address. There is nothing demeaning to European Man in this assessment. It is necessary and it is righteous.
Posted by shivani on July 04, 2006, 04:04 PM | #
wtf u white ppl make me sick, im not racist against you guys since mos tof my friends are white, but what they hell you guys think your so good looking?!! PSHHH...u all are soo proud of ur white skin....then WHY THE F*** ALL THE WHITE GIRLS HERE are soooo OBBESSED WITH TANNING...mmmm maybe to get the ARTICFICAL tan skin such as INDIANS AND OTHER BROWN PEOPLE....oh and their thin features are soo gorgeous...THEN WHY THEY HELL YOU WHITE PEOPLE USING ALL THESE BEAUTY PRODUCTS SUCH AS LIP GLOSS AND LIP INJECTIONS TO GET FULLER LIPS!??!....and culture: all the white girls going around wearing cute sequinced “ballet flats” saying aww look at my cute new shoes!!! when acutually they are PUNJABI SHOES (type of INDIANS… FOR YOU WHITE DUMBASSES) and indian girls have been wearing them for centuries....and why they hell you girls goin around wearing indian jewerly and clothes....why the hell dont u guys follow ur own culture......OH YEAH THATS RIGHT I FORGOT.....YOU DONT HAVE ONE!!! and you guys think your soo smart?! wtf most the indians that are in us and england are there to do jobs YOU WHITE PPL CANT DO SUCH AS DOCTORS AND ENGINEERS....you guys are soo dumb....heck im in AP ENGLISH IN MY HIGH SCHOOL AND HALF THE PEOPLE IN MY CLASS ARENT WHITE....MOST OF THE WHITE PEOPLE ARE IN REGULAR ENGLISH GETS C’s, D’s, F’s.....in a class of their OWN LANGUAGE!!!
Posted by Racist to the maximum on July 06, 2006, 12:05 PM | #
Dude, I know u have done some research but your ideas r simply racist. Beauty is inthe eye of the beholder. Humans are all equal irrespective of sex, race, skin colour. Grow up mate.
Posted by Malcolm A on July 08, 2006, 05:22 PM | #
Hi G.W.
What is your ethnic interest in this discussion?
You call yourself a scientist and you appear to believe that science is some kind of ultimate truth, without which deliberative grace all else is illusion. This is not a fit foundation for serious debate. It leads you to ascribe too much importance to your own opinions and not enough to others.
Fertility can be read as birth-rate or as ease of conception. The former is well below replacement, the latter has been troubling scientists - real ones - for at least a decade. What are you denying, exactly?
The post-war alien influx into the West is a disaster for us. Physical dispossession and the permanent harm of miscegenation (which is your life-choice, I understand) are terrible problems which we must find a way to address. There is nothing demeaning to European Man in this assessment. It is necessary and it is righteous.
1. The point is that I don’t believe in the widely held “Myth” that the white race is endangered by any other race. It never was and never will be.
Low fertility, if true, can be resolved by scientific means - eugenics etc..and we possess enough hi tech to do that
Immigration was a well thought out policy to keep western society from disintegrating byway of there being not enough people to do the difficult and unpleasant labor work that we arent willing to do anymore. In South Africa, a vey small white minority managed to thrive despite being outnumbered a100 :1. |Were thry in danger of being assimilated ever ? I dont think so.
2. I don’t believe that admitting the fact that some women of other races are prettier than some beautiful white women is in any way endangering the survival of the white race.
3. This FEAR MONGERING - “white race is endangered ! It’s very survival is at risk !! We are the underdogs !!!” etc - is the actual cause of our downfall as it erodes our self confidence.
AND MOST OF ALL THESE MYTHS ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY SCIENCE AND SCIENCE IS THE UNIVERSAL YARDSTICK irrespective of whether you and I agree or not.
Posted by Guessedworker on July 08, 2006, 06:02 PM | #
Malcolm,
Now your political naivety is shining though. Loss of living space is killing to a people. Loss of culture is killing, too. If you devalue these things to the point where you “don’t believe in the widely held Myth” etc, etc you will simply fail to grasp the arguments, and that is what is happening.
Nonetheless, the arguments are irrefutable. If high “r” peoples gain admission to a geographic area belonging to a high “K” people, and if that high “K” people are seduced into complacency by liberalism, and their remaining survival instincts are effectively outlawed by their own Establishment, the prognosis is poor, wouldn’t you say?
So which part of this “myth” do you not believe in?
That the native peoples of the West are losing living space?
That their populations are receding, and all population growth in their homelands is due to immigration?
That their interests have been shaped by the individualism and self-interest which is the end-product of the liberal zeitgeist?
That their normal, healthy expression of EGI - visible among other all peoples in all other societies - has been rendered morally illegitimate, and in several important regards actually illegal?
On the “well thought out policy” of immigration, outside of organised Jewry, I don’t believe it was thought through at all. Certainly, the post-War British govenments stumbled into it with very little understanding of what it might mean.
On science, it is NOT the universal yardstick, since not all people are members of the cognitive community. Philosophy IS, since all people have ideas, however knowingly, which arise in serious thought. Actually, science is only politically valid to the degree it is “potable”.
Malcolm, this is a very long thread and takes a while to load. We will take quite a while, I think, to penetrate your carapace of complacency. Why don’t you find a suitable alternative and camp there, if you seriously want to discuss politics.
Posted by Stefan Kallin on July 09, 2006, 07:38 AM | #
Being myself a blond blue-eyed male with Swedish parents I tell you this: Scandinavians have lived their life in Scandinavia for some thousands years without much interference. Reason? No one wants to come here because there’s nothing here to get. The only times we had contact with the outer world is when we made war on it (Vikings and Thirty year War).
Most of us would rather live somewhere else where it is warm and the food is plenty. Our present situation is as mentioned due to advanced social democratics.
Furthermore I would like to see some pictures of your faces before you criticise the looks of any woman.
Posted by Emily on July 10, 2006, 06:03 PM | #
By nordic white women being more beuatiful, do you mean compared to indian women, or all, such as asian, spanish, etc?
Posted by Malcolm A on July 10, 2006, 07:29 PM | #
Hi G.W.
Point taken.
Will decamp, if that’s what you want me to do.
I am unsure as to whetehr I can camp elsewhere, though, due to time constraints and lack of knowhow !
Cheers.
Page 4 of 9 pages « FirstP < 2 3 4 5 6 > Last »
Next entry: Multiculturalism and false concessions
Previous entry: Christians singled out
Existential Issues
Of note
Recent Comments
John commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/14/10, 01:23 PM. (go) (view)
John commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 11:30 AM. (go) (view)
Guessedworker commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/14/10, 11:11 AM. (go) (view)
John commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/14/10, 11:05 AM. (go) (view)
John commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/14/10, 10:49 AM. (go) (view)
Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 10:43 AM. (go) (view)
Gorboduc commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/14/10, 10:25 AM. (go) (view)
Borvo commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 08:54 AM. (go) (view)
Dan Dare commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/14/10, 06:31 AM. (go) (view)
jamesUK commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/14/10, 05:03 AM. (go) (view)
Guessedworker commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/13/10, 09:27 AM. (go) (view)
John commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/13/10, 07:40 AM. (go) (view)
Grimoire commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/13/10, 06:09 AM. (go) (view)
Wandrin commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/13/10, 05:02 AM. (go) (view)
Grimoire commented in entry 'DDR or Third Reich, which would you choose?' on 03/13/10, 04:47 AM. (go) (view)
jamesUK commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/13/10, 02:59 AM. (go) (view)
jamesUK commented in entry 'DDR or Third Reich, which would you choose?' on 03/13/10, 02:34 AM. (go) (view)
James Bowery commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/13/10, 01:14 AM. (go) (view)
Wandrin commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/13/10, 12:56 AM. (go) (view)
Wandrin commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/13/10, 12:52 AM. (go) (view)
Tylo commented in entry 'The Cubans of Miami' on 03/13/10, 12:44 AM. (go) (view)
Dan Dare commented in entry 'DDR or Third Reich, which would you choose?' on 03/13/10, 12:28 AM. (go) (view)
FB commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/13/10, 12:15 AM. (go) (view)
onetwothree commented in entry 'DDR or Third Reich, which would you choose?' on 03/12/10, 11:35 PM. (go) (view)
Dasein commented in entry 'DDR or Third Reich, which would you choose?' on 03/12/10, 11:02 PM. (go) (view)
Thunder commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/12/10, 10:59 PM. (go) (view)
Dan Dare commented in entry 'DDR or Third Reich, which would you choose?' on 03/12/10, 09:41 PM. (go) (view)
Dasein commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/12/10, 09:37 PM. (go) (view)
Dasein commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/12/10, 09:35 PM. (go) (view)
John commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/12/10, 09:28 PM. (go) (view)
Wandrin commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/12/10, 09:27 PM. (go) (view)
Guessedworker commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/12/10, 09:17 PM. (go) (view)
Wandrin commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/12/10, 09:08 PM. (go) (view)
Wandrin commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/12/10, 08:16 PM. (go) (view)
Dan Dare commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/12/10, 07:48 PM. (go) (view)
Recent Posts
- Apologies for the down-time
- It’s Official – fake money is as good as the real thing (if not better)
- Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.
- DDR or Third Reich, which would you choose?
- Greece thwarts Barbarossa, yet again
- Europe’s Future: Is this what “they” want?
- ‘Enlightened’ Child Abuse
- My latest teleology
- The Revolution of Kai Murros
- Linda Carty, the Reprieve lie machine, and the bleeding heart of Clive Stafford Smith
- Humour and the English Disease
- True Science is Barbaric
- The New Rome; or, the United States of the World (1853)
- Cameron on Griffin and the MultiCult
- Absurd assumptions about life’s advantages
- Was It Real For You?
- ‘A Dark Intrigue…’ The Revolutions of 1848
- Pay-Back for the BNP
- The End of Teleology
- Just Add the ‘R’ Word
General News
Science News
Science Categories
All Categories
The Writers
Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.
Links
Endorsement not implied.
Crime
General
- American Renaissance
- Age of Treason
- Balder
- Brussels Journal
- Civic platform
- CofCC
- Chronicles
- Crosstar
- Culture Wars
- Dissecting Leftism
- Face Right
- Fallen Freedom
- Fred on everything
- Freedom Site
- From The Wilderness
- Frontierist News
- Gates of Vienna
- God help Britain
- Hogtown Front
- I am an Englishman
- Inductivist
- iSteve
- Modern Tribalist
- National Policy Institute
- Occidental Dissent
- Occidental Quarterly
- Our Way of Life
- Oz Conservative
- ParaPundit
- The Political Cesspool
- Romanian National Vanguard
- Rusty Mason
- Renaissance Press
- Right Now magazine
- Salisbury Review
- Sam Francis Column
- Scotchfriend
- Signals From The Brink
- Spoils of War
- Snouck Hurgronje
- Songlight for Dawn
- Stop ACLU
- Tomorrow in Vinland
- Turnabout
- UK Commentators
- Viking Observer
- Western Survival
- White civil rights
Immigration
- American Patrol
- Immigration watchdog
- Immigration Watch Canada
- Limits To Growth
- Migration Watch
- Minutemen
- Numbers USA
- Private police
- Project USA
- Team America
- Vdare
Islam
Jews
- 9/11 – #1, #2
- Banking – #1, #2
- Eric Hufschmid
- Holocaust – #1, #2, #3, #4, #5
- Immigration
- Jewish deception
- Judenfrei
- Michael Delaney
- Subverted nation
- Why the Jews?
Nationalist Political Parties
- British National Party
- Front National (FR)
- Nationaldemokraterna
- Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands
- Vlaams Belang
New Right
Science
Whites in Africa