I’m so excited about this new HBO show that I’m literally counting down the hours until debuts. The trailer is really well done and dark.
Don’t know what it is about this show that makes me want to watch so badly. I love watching shows about white people in small towns where everyone knows everyone and all went to high school together.
I love exploring characters who peaked in high school and how they cope with that decades later.
I love the fact that even though the main character is in her 40s, she can still get picked up by a guy in a bar because he realizes he’s no spring chicken himself. I love the fact that even though they’re both in their 40s, they both look kind of good and make a great couple.
I love the fact that the main character can’t stand her mother because judging from the town, her mom’s probably a right-wing wacko who I wouldn’t be able to stand either.
I love the scene where the main character’s little kid is so proud his mom’s a legend in the town “Dey think you a heroooooo!”
And of course, there’s even the obligatory “noble negro” stereotype that offers her salvation at the end of the trailer.
I also love the haunting music.
Pumpkin Person 
“I love watching shows about white people in small towns where everyone knows everyone and all went to high school together.”
Some good shows that come to mind: Fargo, Jericho, Broadchurch.
Nomadland look very insteresting to watch
Youre a very strange guy puppy. Guy pearce is a great actor though and usually picks projects with really good scripts so it should be worth watching…but not for the weird reasons puppy has.
pp is cool but strikes me as a guy who would hold his date’s purse for her while she dances with another man
Mike Hunt is cool, but strikes me as a guy who would try to steal from his date’s purse, but can’t figure out how to open it.
Nah pumpkin ain’t a cuck like that.
He’s more like the guy who might talk his dates ear off with nerd shit.
A family friend – I’ll call her Miss Jones – worked as a receptionist at the local chemical plant in the ‘90s. Although quite personable, her reputation as a “ditz” was well-established. It was not uncommon for the plant operators to take advantage of her gullibility and good nature. On one occasion, an operator, whom we’ll call Nick Richards, reported to Miss Jones that a gent by the name of Mike Hunt was supposed to meet him on the job more than an hour earlier, but he never showed up. He asked that she call for the missing Mr. Hunt on the public address system. The compliant Miss Jones immediately announced “If anyone knows the whereabouts of Mike Hunt, please contact Nick Richards”. Twenty minutes later, Mr. Richards again contacted the office to say that he still hadn’t heard from Mr. Hunt, yet he was certain he’d seen him early that morning. The receptionist again took to the PA and, this time somewhat annoyedly, called out: Has anyone seen Mike Hunt? Nick Richards would like to see Mike Hunt ASAP.” The workplace can be brutal.
Great thing about having gays like pill in the comment section is they always know the name of the male actors.
Always??
I like cinema but i’m not that retard to fall in love with parasitical good looking actors 😉
I like cinema but i’m not that retard to fall in love with parasitical good looking actors.
I don’t like cinema and I am that dumb. Philosopher has bad taste, Guy Pearce is so old!
Just watched the first episode of Mare on Crave. Very good writing like pill predicted, and the setting is excellent, but way too depressing for my preferences omg.
Just want to say that I love, love Kate Winslet and she looks much better than just “kind of good.”
“Makes me watch so badly”
Prefer Dungeons & Dragons
I’m addicted.
Is there a dnd show now or are you talking about the game?
I’m talking about the classical american cartoon of 80’s.
“I love the fact that even though they’re both in their 40s, they both look kind of good…”
LOL
Less Oprah who look fabulous.
PP, have you heard of the Great British Intelligence Test. Every year the BBC does a special on intelligence and puts together an online IQ test that’s taken by hundreds of thousands. There are 16 subtests. Many remind me of the WAIS when I took it.
https://gbit.cognitron.co.uk/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/5tFHwWMgg9VbrHT9kvGlFqd/the-great-british-intelligence-test
Crushed the short-term and medium-term memory tests did well on verbal comprehension and spatial memory and did worse than average on the rest.
It says I scored in the top 5th percentile of short and medium-term memory but the chart shows Im probably in the top 1st percentile. Didnt expect this but hey ill take it!
Have you ever been professionally tested?
The test underestimates my WAIS verbal reasoning (below average on this but in the 98th percentile there). Everything else was around the 85th percentile mark.
I wish it would give a composite score though.
I did this.
Prospective memory object – immediate (short term memory) = top 5%
Words 1 – immediate (short term memory) = top 20- 10% range
Blocks (Spatial intelligence) = bottom 50% range
Tower of London (planning) = bottom 50% range
Digit Span Task (verbal working memory) = bottom 50% range
Spatial Span (Spatial working memory) = bottom 50% range
Verbal Analogies (verbal reasoning) = bottom 50% range (heavily penalized because i’m not native english speaker)
Target detection (attention) = 20-10% range
Words definition (verbal comprehension) = 50-40% range (again)
2d manipulations (mental rotation) = bottom 50%
Faulty towers task (3d spatial reasoning) = top 5% range
Prospective memory object – delayed (medium term memory) = top 5% range
Prospective memory – words 1 – delayed (medium term memory) = 30-20% range
Very aleatory results
Prospective memory object – immediate (short term memory)= Top 5%
Words 1 – immediate (short term memory) = Bottom 50%
Blocks (Spatial intelligence) = Top 30% -20%
Tower of London (planning) = Top 20% – 10%
Digit Span Task (verbal working memory) = Top 20% – 10%
Spatial Span (Spatial working memory) = Top 5%
Verbal Analogies (verbal reasoning) = Top 20% – 10%
Target detection (attention) = Top 30% -20%
Words definition (verbal comprehension) = Top 20% – 10%
2d manipulations (mental rotation) = Top 5%
Faulty towers task (3d spatial reasoning) = Top 5%
Prospective memory object – delayed (medium term memory) = Top 5%
Prospective memory – words 1 – delayed (medium term memory) = Top 30% – 20%
Weird how i did better the second time around on words 1
What’s our IQs based off of this Pumpkin?
My guess based on percentiles would be around 115.
I’m relatively above avg IQ or quantit intelligence but undoubtly above avg on divergent thinking and somewhat good at emotional intelligence or also empathy (why they don’t showed empathy results ??) but often or characteristically these intelligence tests (also) lack on nuanced approach. For example, you can got an approximate answer that you wont absolutely wrong at all. This happens more time than we know. Another problem with these tests is when you got the right answer by luck but it’s seems unnoticed by the person who is administering it. Of course i’m not even talking about another very important facets of human intelligence here.
Santo you are the lowest person in the room in emotional intelligence. You absolutely cannot control your emotions. You are neurotic.
“Emotional intelligence (otherwise known as emotional quotient or EQ) is the ability to understand, use, and manage your own emotions in positive ways to relieve stress, communicate effectively, empathize with others, overcome challenges and defuse conflict.”
Emotional intelligence is not just emotional control and i don’t need control my emotion to deal with a racaille subhuman as you. [redacted by pp, 2021-04-19]
If intelligence is control then emotional intelligence would be pretty like emotional control BUT intelligence crudely speaking implies understanding then emotional intelligence is emotional understading and not necessarily control. Reacting with hostility with hostile subhumans is very appropriate thought.
I may have to re-subscribe to HBO. After learning that the show’s geographic focus is less than 18 miles from my childhood home in Marcus Hook, PA – an oil town on the west bank of the Delaware River – I’m intrigued.
Oh cool! I had no idea where it took place, just figured it was some seasonal generic working class white town. HBO’s my favorite network but tastes differ.
[redacted by pp, 2021-04-19] i must repost this take down from a hard scientist of piffer.
http://www.pienisalaliittotutkimus.com/2019/05/08/piffer-fails-science-prevails/
“Did you get it? Piffer’s, and Dunkel et al’s, correlation is a mathematical consequence of the way the PGS is created. It is not any research result. It does not prove anything of the importance of genes to IQ. It is similar to a case where you put a stone in your pocket and later find it, or where you, at some less obvious step multiply your number by three and at the end show, look, it is divisible by three. Of course there is a correlation between the country PGS score and the country average IQ, because the country average IQ highly correlates with country average educational achievement, and you created a predictor which should give a linear correlation between country PGS and country educational achievements.
Some people are impressed that Piffer’s results repeat in each test. Of course they must repeat. The reason there is the correlation is a mathematical identity. It must always repeat, but it does not mean anything. You would get the correlation even if the SNPs had no influence to the property P.”
Wow so basically it’s just circular reasoning. Meaning the results are absolutely useless.
Another nail in the coffin.
No it’s not circular if he can predict the IQ ranking of groups not included in the sample from which the scores were created
The paper states:
The problem clearly is in Dunkel et al (2019) as they compare two subpopulations, which have different genes and different IQs, and these two subpopulations were both in the prediction sample. This study must therefore be discarded. It does not matter that Jews were only one percent: the PGS score for them comes from this one percent.
This argument can only explain why high IQ white ethnic groups (including Jews) have higher IQs than lower IQ white ethnic groups. It can’t explain polygenic scores correlating perfectly with the East Asian > White > South Asian > Native American > Black IQ ranking since no non-white groups were used to build the polygenic scores so there’s no a priori reason for whites to be correctly ranked with respect to non-whites and for non-whites to be correctly ranked with respect to each other.
“After all, Piffer calculates PGS scores to countries which were not in the prediction sample. Yes, maybe, but here we have another problem. These outliers are rather far from Europeans, the Fst distance is large, so they could have their own IQ affecting SNPs. They do not seem to, but the fact that they do not seem to have their own SNPs is a different reason than what Piffer’s correlation says. Piffer’s straight line says that Sub Saharan populations have low IQ because they do not have European SNPs. The correct way would be to say: naturally they do not have European SNPs as they are not admixed with Europeans. The problem is that they do not have their own SNPs. Thus, Piffer is wrong, even though his result agrees with the reality. If it does, as Lynn and Rushton have estimated that without environmental reasons Sub Saharan IQ would be some 15 points higher.”
He seems to have more posts on the issue. I’ll continue reading and come back
These outliers are rather far from Europeans, the Fst distance is large, so they could have their own IQ affecting SNPs
Non-white groups may have their own SNPs, but it’s noteworthy that the SNPs they share with whites cause them all to rank with respect to whites & with respect to each other exactly as IQ data predicts.
“I hope these supremacists understand that people from hard science think exactly the same of people in soft fields: those people in soft fields, like psychology, just cannot think logically. Half of my former colleagues would place IQ researchers somewhere between chiropractors and astronomers”.
Ouch.
[redacted by pp, 2021-04-19]
1. there are only three races compared.
2. black africans are much less similar to europeans at genetic level than chinapeople.
therefore: even what peepee claims is evidence is merely consistent, nothing unusual.
3. vietnamese and chinese do NOT have higher IQs than white british. more developed china peope countries score higher on the PISA.
james lee is a [redacted by pp, 2021-04-19] chinaman and he says:
Because the discovery sample used to construct the score consisted of individuals of European ancestry, we would not expect the predictive power of our score to be as high in other ancestry groups7,26,27. Indeed, when our score is used to predict EduYears in a sample of African-Americans from the HRS (N = 1,519), the score only has an incremental R2 of 1.6%, implying an attenuation of 85%…Second, we found that our score for EA has much lower predictive power in an African-American sample than in a European-ancestry sample, and we anticipate that the score would also have reduced predictive power in other non-European-ancestry samples. Therefore, until polygenic scores are available that have as much predictive power in other ancestry groups, the score will be most useful in research that is focused on European-ancestry samples.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6393768/
1. there are only three races compared.
No, there are five: East Asians, Europeans, South Asians, Americans, and sub-Saharans.
2. black africans are much less similar to europeans at genetic level than chinapeople.
therefore: even what peepee claims is evidence is merely consistent, nothing unusual.
Ideally we’d want to replicate the racial rankings using polygenic scores calculated from sub-Saharans and every other group for that matter, but even assuming different groups have different genomic IQ architecture, the more distant group would be just as likely to lack negative variants as positive ones.
no. i LITERALLY mean that the average IQ of citizens of the PRC and vietnam is lower than that of white british.
but not because genes.
because most chinese and 90+% of vietnamese have lived in material circumstances MUCH lower and much more DESPARATE than 50+% of white british.
and the IQs you see are for a select group of these people.
noctice also piffer has claimed a n s gradient in IQ in europe but his latest claims the cleverest europeans after finns are spaniards, a group peepee has claimed were only lucky to rule the best for 150 years.
a soi-disant jew kicked me out of her liquor store for making a joke about gypsies. why did i make the joke?
because she and some fat white guy were complaining about the gypsy in the parking lot.
jewish privilege.
AND they insisted on taking my picture.
but who would’ve thought a jew would be a liquor store cashier? [redacted by pp, 2021-04-19]
notice also piffer has claimed a n s gradient in IQ in europe but his latest claims the cleverest europeans after finns are spaniards, a group peepee has claimed were only lucky to rule the best for 150 years.
One thing to consider about the Vietnamese sample in Piffer’s study is that they’re [ethnic] Kinh in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. In a country which is largely rural, they’re not necessarily representative.
I wouldn’t make too much about small differences in polygenic scores, like all estimates they have margins of error. On the whole, their correlation with the IQs of different groups is very high.
[redacted by pp, 2021-04-09] supposed difference in IQ associated SNP frequencies has changed over time.
Greek mathematics was much more sophisticated than the mathematics that had been developed by earlier cultures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_mathematics#Greek
The knowledge of this technology was lost at some point in antiquity. Clockwork later appeared in the medieval Byzantine and Islamic worlds, but works with similar complexity did not appear again until the development of mechanical astronomical clocks in Europe in the fourteenth century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism
and lee found PGS explained only 7% of the variance in IQ among europeans.
so EVEN what peepee thinks she has found is MEANINGESS. peepee says: “see chinapeople are genetically superior because slightly higher in that 7%.”
so fuckig stupid!
peepee also says: “saying chinapeople are genetically superior isn’t racism. saying white people are genetically superior is racism.”
SNP frequencies has changed over time.
It’s possible specific ethnic groups have traded places in the IQ hierarchy over time, but the ranking of the big three is so ancient and so deep that it has remained constant since the Upper Paleolithic.
and lee found PGS explained only 7% of the variance in IQ among europeans.
And head size would only explain about 5% of the variance among Europeans and yet group differences in head size correlate strongly with group differences in IQ:
Small correlations at the individual level can be hugely predictive at the group level because individual error cancels out. Think about it dumb-dumb.
those differences is brain size are FALSE.
we’ve already been through this ad nauseum.
Well the best cranial capacity data comes from Rushton’s sample of U.S. army (it’s been double checked by his toughest critics):
Asian Americans = 1391 cc
European Americans = 1378 cc
African Americans = 1362 cc
Gender combined value for upper paleolithic humans was 1500-something cubic centimeters with a larger standard deviation size than contemporaries, I am getting it from a more-or-less-recent paper looking more specifically at cro magnon 1. Interestingly, in all lobes, upper paleolithic humans were larger, with the smallest difference being in the parietal lobe. But they had a slightly smaller cerebellum surface. Isn’t that the exact opposite of what the average joe would guess on the topic? My guess is that they were much better at direct concrete spatial perception and verbal ability to express it, but not all that much better at abstract spatial (parietal) perception.
They were less than 80 cc bigger brained than people today but even that difference probably vanishes when you adjust for their great muscle mass and decomposition bias (smaller skulls decompose leaving mostly the biggest to be found):
>when you adjust for their great muscle mass
The pre-LGM average body mass for males was something around 150 lbs at a stature of 177 cm or so. Varied from culture period to culture period, but that is the average. It is not too excessive. The disproportionate robustness was mostly cranial. The heaviest European upper paleolithic male I know of on the pre-LGM record was ~83 kg at 188 cm with a 1880 cc cranial capacity.
And I don’t put much stock in decomposition bias.
To simplify, let us refer to a single gene, rather than a polygenic score.
Suppose there were two groups, one of which was selected for some complex polygenic trait, and one of which was not. Suppose you found a gene which accounted for some small portion of the variance in that trait. As selection occurred, the frequency of that gene would increase, i.e., the frequency would be higher in the group that had the trait selected for.
Even though the difference in frequency of that particular gene does not adequately explain the difference in character, a difference in frequency is evidence of selection for the trait the gene is associated with. Different intensities of selection would naturally result in population differences.
To return to the case of the polygenic score, while it’s true that the score doesn’t necessarily indicate a meaningful difference, that there is a difference in that which the score can capture gives us reason to suspect (though not a definitive proof) that there is difference in the rest.
Having said that, the Chinese have historically been surprisingly inept at science. Presumably there is a reason.
https://aeon.co/essays/how-the-fall-of-the-roman-empire-paved-the-road-to-modernity
Yes, there is a reason. It’s underlain by the physics of the material world. Because the Oriental is prone to internal consistency, they stagnate the physics that makes resource undulation possible.
The Occidental has peaks and troughs in civilization that’s redistributional. This allows for an eventual quality to descend to the masses, never before seen; allowing for a more privatized market with higher bargaining potential of peasants with nobles. The Oriental does not grow because they balk at the physics of the natural world – they are an uncanny representation of high intelligence; they are the human that wants to strike at God’s creation. The Occidental is aligned with the innate chaos, which is fundamental for growth.
it’s the same as if you did a gwas on dog intelligence and each dog was axed “how good are you at math?” and it was determined that wolves are dumber than dogs and chihuahuas are the smartest dog.
“dumb-dumb….. remained constant since the Upper Paleolithic.”
Lol, nothing in China compared to Europe in the upper Paleolithic or Africa in the later Stone Age.
I should also mention that Europeans diverge from East Asians.
I’d be very surprised if it was like that going back that far. I bet blacks were always at the bottom though.
You’d bet wrong of course.
However, I’d bet you’ve always been on the bottom of blacks lmao
It is important to consider that there is little genetic continuity from the European Upper Paleolithic to the moderns and that China is an exception to the declining brain size in through neolithic trend.
You have a source for that last statement? Seems interesting.
Also I should mention it’s not like China was just absent of shit but the ancient hierarchy Is more like: China=or<AfricaEurope>Africa peddled by racists.
But in my opinion I think the only reason Europe is “better” is that we simply found more fossils and tools because 1. They preserve better there and 2. Historically Europe has been the center of attention archaeologically.
China=or<Africa Europe>Africa******
Lol why the fuck does that keep doing that. I’ll just spell it
China is less than or equal to Africa which is less than Europe
Compared to most HBDer’s hypothesis which is that China is greater than Europe which is greater than Africa.
For the last statement: compare modern Chinese cranial capacity to upper paleolithic ones from China. There is Zhoukoudian 1 male with 1500cc, slightly below the modern Chinese male average and the females are either at or below the modern Chinese female average. You can search more stuff about the samples from that cave. That isn’t all, the Japanese Minatogawa had a lower value than the Zhoukoudian samples with the male being 1390cc, though to be fair, Minatogawa were small people; both in height and width. In the upper paleolithic, east Asians modern homo sapiens skulls had a lower cranial capacity than the contemporary Europeans, and in the modern day, the situation is reversed (though as stated earlier, the old Europeans don’t have much genetic continuity with later ones).
I should also mention that Europeans diverge from East Asians
Citation needed. Rushton implied the opposite
https://academic.oup.com/gbe/article/6/3/466/576141#89443855
https://www.google.com/amp/s/heritageofjapan.wordpress.com/2014/08/16/bold-new-dna-2014-study-proposes-when-and-where-the-three-major-populations-of-africa-europe-and-east-asians-diverged-and-suggests-why-the-ainu-look-like-europeans/amp/
“The node marked with the blue circle in figure 2 suggests that the East Asians are ancestral to the Europeans. The bootstrap value of the node is 99%. Therefore, both male and female lineages suggest that Europeans diverged from within East Asian ancestors or that they interbred with East Asian individuals up to a certain divergence time.”
“As our phylogenetic trees demonstrate, the European alleles at the five loci have diverged from the ancestral East Asian alleles.”
And of course before this discovery the consensus was: “traditional view that Europeans and East Asians simultaneously diverged from African ancestors 55,000 years ago.”
Oh this article. I could be wrong but I suspect what happened was both Europeans and East Asians split from Oceanians, but because Oceanians later mixed with East Asians (Southeast Asians), it looks like one of the East Asian branches is ancestral:
You are wrong. Europeans and EA did not diverge from Oceanians.
Moreover, we could disregard this whole study, and you’d still be wrong. Because the former consensus was that both Europeans and EA diverged from Africans 55,000 years ago.
And of course before this discovery the consensus was: “traditional view that Europeans and East Asians simultaneously diverged from African ancestors 55,000 years ago.”
This is also nonsense. It’s been known since Stringer (1988) that non-Africans split from Africans about 110,000 years ago & Mongoloids split from Caucasoids 41,000 years ago. Rushton built his theory on these dates:
It’s not nonsense you just rely on outdated data. It doesn’t even make sense. How could non Africans split from Africans if they were still in fucking Africa.
And as I said, Ruston is racist and a bad scientist. Censor it if you must but it’s the truth. So either way you have to deal with it.
The jig is up Pumpkin. Are you man enough to admit you’re wrong?
It’s not nonsense you just rely on outdated data. It doesn’t even make sense. How could non Africans split from Africans if they were still in fucking Africa.
Because fucking Africa’s a big fucking place, unlike your brain. And all these dates have a huge margin of error around them so the data of African-nonAfrican split might be too old and the date of the Out of Africa exodus might be too young but we’ve known since 1988 that non-Africans split from Africans long before Mongoloids and Caucasoids split
And as I said, Ruston is racist and a bad scientist. Censor it if you must but it’s the truth. So either way you have to deal with it.
The jig is up Pumpkin. Are you man enough to admit you’re wrong?
Of course I’d admit I’m wrong, but I don’t think I am:
pp you are kind of using outdated stuff, there is a recent paper which shows east asians, or at least proto east asians receiving admixture from a group upstream from the east-west Eurasian split. Ironically enough, this group represents the first modern human of Europe. Modern Europeans also have admixture from a pre-split stream but it unknown where that one is from, but both the mystery European contributor and the newly discovered east Asian contributor are probably similar in their split temporal distance. So both groups (modern East Asians and modern Europeans) have input from groups that in the phylogeny split closer to the Africans than to the more recent Eurasian splits. Going by this, both Europeans and East Asians are less evolved than any group which hasn’t received or received minimal admixture from a pre-east-west Eurasian split. Your system, not mine.
all races have archaic admixture but it’s never even close to the majority of their genomes
I am not talking about archaic admixture pp, I am talking about modern homo sapiens admixture from a group which split between the Eurasia-African split and the later East-West Eurasian split. It was about 39% of an early East Asian’s ancestry. Modern Europeans also have ancestry from a medium divergent group like that, but not that particular group. My advice is to just look at measurements (like intelligence) if you are looking for hierarchy, overarching schemas like that don’t work out as intended and/or need constant updates.
“Because fucking Africa’s a big fucking place,”
No you dipshit I mean how can they be Non african if they were still in fucking africa. You mean they weren’t negroid?
Either way it’s irrelevant to the previous point being made
“but I don’t think I am:”
It doesn’t matter. You are. Why should I trust your outdated sources back by racist people over the studies I’ve provided that use superior methods?
@King Melo
One could differentiate sub saharan africans from non-sub saharan Africans based on the “Eurasian” bottleneck. The think is we don’t know where it tool place, it could have taken place in North Africa just as easily as the Levant.
btw, i think the HARD truth is what our human brains see…we don’t need machine learning to know what we know…
1. china people ARE superior in some ways intellectual on average.
2. china people ARE inferior in some ways non-intellectual and in one way intellectual.
a. china people are obedient.
b. gold medal VIQ is monopolized by europeans…AND silver medal is south asians.
judge cahill may be a hero at this point.
the judeg can always overrule the jury for the defense. he can’t overrule for the defense.
ideally the jury would be dismissed and cahill would say: “derek was being a dick. but if every dick had to go to prison, most americans would be in prison.
You can just imagine a cuck like melo begging a big scary black man to do his wife and giving the man the keys to his house while he goes to live in the dog kennel and puts a dog collar around his neck.
“You can just imagine a cuck like melo begging a big scary black man to do his wife and giving the man the keys to his house while he goes to live in the dog kennel and puts a dog collar around his neck.”
-typed the cuck furiously as his wife moaned from Tyrone’s BBC reaching deep into her womb in the background
dicks don’t enter wombs
They do if they’re big enough. Lmao
I’d think that it would result in damage to both the penis and the cervix. Bad news for both.
My psychiatrist suggested I wasn’t racist today and I had to correct him that I was a racist. This is called INTELLECTUAL INTEGRITY. Its something none of you have.
none?
i have the integrity to admit that some white women find black men the most physically attractive.
and the integrity to say…
according to dating sites this is < 90% of white women.
Sadly, women find black men to be the least attractive.
That’s not true.
sadly you can’t stop lying.
white women find asian men the least attractive.
the most attractive white men have the balance of SAVAGE/VIKING/ROMAN and pretty.
the most attractive whitemen are “beautiful killers”.
no other men have that.
some women find delon to be bleh, but madonna wrote a song about him and santo posted a picture of him.
too pretty perhaps.
Lies, it’s only Jewish propaganda, white women still prefer white men on average
Sadly?
And I thought OKcupid statistics showed that Asian men were the least attractive men and black women the least attractive women? Not sure if that was just taking into account appearance or attractiveness as a whole?
Wtf are you talking about? Attractiveness hierarchy in the minds of straight women of all races is: Whites >= Blacks > Latinos > Middle Easterners > East Asians > Indians
Asian-American women more often than not refuse to date Asian men.
Was looking at the news of the proposed superleague and you know me being HBD aware I knew many of the clubs that want to break away are owned by jews. Anyway it got me thinking whether jews literally have something in the brains that makes them attentive to making money. Some sort of ‘money sense’. Nothing to do with IQ, but entrepreneurial vision. It would be pretty weird that a human could develop something physical in the brain over an abstraction like money. Are there any known examples of this happening in biology? The closest I can think of right now is Pavlov.
I was for the superleague but after hearing the arguments against it and seeing that the clubs would still participate in domestic league anyway, I’m against it.
there’s like a DIS-connect for some people.
the chauvin trial showed what i had claimed from less than a week after floyd’s death AND more.
i told my dad, “i could’ve done a better prosecturion of oj than the proesuction did.”
he told me, “i don’t doubt it. the prosecution lost because it was totally incompetent and the judge let the trial get out of control.”
my mom told me, “if bugliosi had been the prosecutor oj would’ve fried.”
more details if peepee posts.
You would not have won. Very hard to convince a black jury that a famous black man is guilty, especially when some of law enforcement was shown to be racist.
“the chauvin trial showed what i had claimed from less than a week after floyd’s death AND more.”
Nope! The defense contradicted itself multiple times.
No overdose as I’ve already proven.
I’m waiting.
I think I am Schizophrenic.
Do you believe in your fantasies, like god??
(Take notes about how psychology should work)
I believe in some yes
I didn’t realize it while watching but this show is actually pretty scary. Trying to sleep but keep glancing at the window for the peeper. The scene where she drives past him is so creepy. OMG UNSETTLING
So glad y’all are watching. I taped the first episode and am saving it for Friday night when I don’t have to work the next day and can enjoy with a pizza