[Update Feb 6, 2017: I just did an internet search of others who had posted on similar topics to this in the past and iconic blogger Steve Sailer deserves enormous credit for many of the ideas in this post]
There are at least four major types of masculinity. Two of them mental and two of them physical.
1. Cognitive masculinity
This is characterized by having a spatial IQ > verbal IQ, and a math IQ > Theory of Mind IQ. If you have extreme cognitive masculinity you become autistic. One of the great mysteries is why some autistics are billionaire computer Geniuses and Nobel prize winners and so many others are severely mentally retarded. Perhaps it’s because if your verbal IQ is too much lower than your spatial IQ, then you can’t learn language and if you can’t learn language, you can’t function at all in human society, but a little autism appears to be a good thing.
By contrast if you have very little cognitive masculinity, you will rely on intuition instead of logic which is good up to a point, but if you travel too far down that road you become a delusional schizophrenic.
2. Emotional masculinity
This is where I’m lacking. People are always complaining that I am too nice and too moral for my own good and at work I have so much trouble firing people because like a woman, I worry so much about what will happen to them and have way too much compassion for others, including animals and even plants (which makes no sense since plants can’t feel pain). Ideally a leader needs to be tough and devious and not let people take advantage of him, but you don’t want to be too emotionally masculine because you’ll be a psychopath.
One reason women like “bad boys” is because they’re emotionally masculine. I was watching a documentary about my favorite horror franchise Halloween, and while most of the hard-core fans were guys, a few were blond blue eyed very sexual women who were such huge fans of the series that they flashed their breasts to the camera asking “see anything you like?” (a reference to a nude scene in the original Halloween). When asked why they loved the films’ iconic serial killer Michael Myers so much, one woman gushed “there’s something so masculine about him.”
Nobody cared about actor Michael C. Hall when he played David in Six Feet Under but once he played Dexter the serial killer, he suddenly became a sex symbol, even though the former was a much better show.
3. Vertical masculinity
This is simply how tall you are.
4. Horizontal masculinity
This is simply how muscular and robust you are
Masculinity and evolution
As humans evolved from the apes, we became less masculine emotionally and horizontally, but more masculine vertically. This is probably because it’s a more efficient design because being tall and thin consumes fewer calories than being short and robust yet gives you more speed and reach, though less strength.
Masculinity and social class
There are also social class differences in masculinity with the upper class being more vertically masculine and the lower classes being more horizontally masculine. This may help explain the negative correlation between IQ and weight/height ratio.
I noticed this when I went to the gym with an extremely wealthy co-worker. While most guys there were trying to lift the heaviest weights possible, he would only lift pathetically light weights with lots of repetition because he felt that at a height of 5’8″, he would look disproportionate if he gained muscle.
While the lower classes believe the more muscle the better for all men, the upper classes only approve of muscle on men of a certain height and perhaps only up to a point. Some in the upper class consider it worse to be short and muscular than it is to be short and scrawny or even short morbidly fat. I find this very weird but perhaps it’s because the upper class having higher IQs, have a greater sensitivity to abstract concepts like irony or perhaps it’s just class genetic interests discriminating against physiques that reflect blue collar gene pools.
For the journalist the grand father made the fortune as the most famous painting seller (picasso matisse chagall etc) . People knew they had lots of invaluable paintings because they sell 1 every 10 year and they got it in legal free tax haven in switzerland and italy . For the other person, the building have beeb acquired through the year … I think there are plenty of them !
Another exemple , i know that a ceo of big hotel company said to earn 1.8 M. But he invests money lend by banks to make deal as a private person. For example the company doesnt buy the hotel bulding but structure a deal with investors. So someone inside calculated that only is share of hotels are worth 500M to 800M. He is not ranker however is fortune is solely professionnal. I think we have no clue ….
I suspect forbes is more accurate the higher you go up the list. As the billionaire club becomes more inclusive, there are becoming too many for forbes to keep up with but the richer you are, the harder it is to hide it, especially with so many other publications & blogs in addition to forbes making rich lists around the world.
No exact solution is possible when it comes to identifying the super rich. Even two appraisers evaluating the same asset will arrive at different numbers just like two different IQ tests will disagree on who’s brilliant
Forbes is just a rough measure of wealth much like an IQ test is a rough measure of intelligence. Various assets will remain hidden from forbes just as various mental talents will be hidden from IQ tests
But from a historical perspective it matters not how rich you are. It only matters how rich Forbes says you are. For forbes is the arbiter of wealth. They’re the umpire that makes the call in the sport of capitalism