Science Continues Validating CH Reductionism

As I’ve been saying all along, female beauty is objectively measurable and not a function of the beholder’s eye.

The distance between a woman’s eyes and the distance between her eyes and her mouth are key factors in determining how attractive she is to others, according to new psychology research from the University of California, San Diego and the University of Toronto. […]

They discovered two “golden ratios,” one for length and one for width. Female faces were judged more attractive when the vertical distance between their eyes and the mouth was approximately 36 percent of the face’s length, and the horizontal distance between their eyes was approximately 46 percent of the face’s width.

“We already know that different facial features make a female face attractive – large eyes, for example, or full lips,” said Lee, a professor at University of Toronto and the director of the Institute of Child Study at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. “Our study conclusively proves that the structure of faces – the relation between our face contour and the eyes, mouth and nose – also contributes to our perception of facial attractiveness.”

Just think how many wars, inventions, poems, novels, symphonies were created because some woman’s facial bone structure developed a few millimeters in a pleasing direction.

***

Ogling voluptuous women will help a man stay healthy.

A rather bizarre study carried out by German researchers suggests that staring at women’s breasts is good for men’s health and increases their life expectancy.

According to Dr. Karen Weatherby, a gerontologist and author of the study, gawking at women’s breasts is a healthy practice, almost at par with an intense exercise regime, that prolongs the lifespan of a man by five years.

She added, “Just 10 minutes of staring at the charms of a well-endowed female, is roughly equivalent to a 30-minute aerobics work-out.”

I like looking, but fondling is my preferred method of interaction. This probably explains why titty bars have never held my interest for very long. I’ve got to have and to hold the goods.

If 10 minutes of staring at big round tits is equivalent to a 30 minute jog, what does one hour of titty fucking equal? A triathlon?

In addition, she also recommended that men over 40 should gaze at larger breasts daily for 10 minutes.

If you’re an alpha, you are free to gaze for 30 minutes, directly at the boobs and without blinking. Omegas must avert their eyes immediately, and their brief glance must be sidelong and then quickly evaporate under a burn of shame.

***

It’s funny when tired, hoary platitudes crumble. Guess what? You CAN judge a book by its cover.

Observers were able to accurately judge some aspects of a stranger’s personality from looking at photographs, according to a study in the current issue of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (PSBP), the official monthly journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. Self-esteem, ratings of extraversion and religiosity were correctly judged from physical appearance.

Researchers asked participants to assess the personalities of strangers based first on a photograph posed to the researchers’ specifications and then on a photograph posed the way the subject chose. Those judgments were then compared with how the person and acquaintances rated that individual’s personality. They found that while both poses provided participants with accurate cues about personality, the spontaneous pose showed more insight, including about the subject’s agreeableness, emotional stability, openness, likability, and loneliness.

The study suggested that physical appearance alone can send signals about their true personality.

“As we predicted, physical appearance serves as a channel through which personality is manifested,” write authors Laura P. Naumann, University of California, Berkeley, Simine Vazire, Washington University in St. Louis, Peter J. Rentfrow, University of Cambridge, Samuel D. Gosling,University of Texas at Austin. “By using full-body photographs and examining a broad range of traits, we identified domains of accuracy that have been overlooked, leading to the conclusion that physical appearance may play a more important role in personality judgment than previously thought.”

Living in the city has honed my threat detection system. I can, with a split second scan of a stranger’s face, tell you with better than random accuracy the character of that person. This has aided me when walking back from lovers’ apartments at 2 AM through vibrant neighborhoods.

I don’t think I need to tell you the significance of this study with regards to alpha body language and game.

***

Why 99.9% of history’s accomplishments have been achieved by men:

Researchers using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study brain activation have found that men and women respond differently to positive and negative stimuli, according to a study presented today at the annual meeting of theRadiological Society of North America (RSNA).

“Men may direct more attention to sensory aspects of emotional stimuli and tend to process them in terms of implications for required action, whereas women direct more attention to the feelings engendered by emotional stimuli,” said Andrzej Urbanik, M.D., Ph.D., chair of Radiology at Jagiellonian University Hospital in Krakow, Poland.

Like a little fifteen year old girl, defending her feelings inside.

How does that old saying go? Men win the argument to win the group. Women win the group to win the argument. Which preference is more likely to lead one away from the truth? I’ve said it before: Suffrage is the poison pill that eventually destroys the body politic of a nation.

PS: There were two obscure pop culture references in this post. Can you find them?





Comments


  1. First one is Depeche Mode. 😉

    Like


  2. Waffle,

    What’s the DM reference?

    Like


  3. on December 18, 2009 at 3:55 am the one and only

    There are many objectively measurable factors that affect a woman’s beauty (including very obvious ones like good skin and teeth), but that doesn’t mean beauty is objective, let alone that it’s possible to assign a numeric value to a woman’s appearance that’s objectively correct. If you place a woman on a scale and it shows 120 lbs, then that’s just the way it is and you can’t say “well I think it’s 145 lbs.” You can’t do anything like that when discussing a woman’s beauty. You say a woman is a ten and someone else says she’s an eight, but how is it possible to prove or disprove either claim? I’ve seen lots of people make proclamations like “she’s a real ten” but not a single one of those people has ever proven their claim using science. Because it isn’t possible to do so.

    Like


  4. The “ogling breasts” story is complete bullshit.

    This has been floating around the net since late 1999 or early 2000 at the very least. That’s when I first saw it, credited to the New England Journal of Medicine (I called them up and asked, they insisted they had never run any such thing). I have seen multiple versions of it since – the latest prior to this one was about three months ago on Instapundit, always the same text, credit to different people.

    There is no such actual research anywhere, no matter how much you wish there was.

    Like


  5. @ Rollory

    Or, then, ogling breasts either has no effect on life expectancy or reduces life expectancy.

    Given that voluptuous breasts are beautiful things, and in consideration that beautiful things bring us pleasure, it is not much of a stretch, although technically not scientific, to suggest that if anything, there is at least an upwards push to extend life expectancy, however minimal that may be.

    same can be said about being in a beautiful surrounding too, I think.

    Like


  6. http://www.snopes.com/humor/iftrue/breasts.asp

    “The article referred to above was not printed in The New England Journal of Medicine or any other major medical journal. It is, in fact, a slight reworking of a piece that has run on at least two occasions in that celebrated tabloid Fountain of Truth, the Weekly World News (13 May 1997 and 21 March 2000) and has escaped into the wild. Although the Weekly World News occasionally slips up and prints a true story, we suspect this one belongs in the “HOW TO TELL IF YOUR DOG WORSHIPS SATAN!” and “NEW REMOTE-CONTROL DEVICE GIVES WOMEN ORGASMS – AT UP TO 80 YARDS AWAY!” class.”

    Like


  7. Prediction: Either

    A) Roissy will claim the boob part was a (very subtle) joke

    B) This whole post will disappear down a spider hole like the MILF-DILF post where most readers strongly disagreed with him, some random BS excuse will be offered.

    Like


  8. on December 18, 2009 at 4:58 am msexceptiontotherule

    ” Steve Johnson

    Waffle,
    What’s the DM reference?”

    I believe that would be the part about the fifteen year old girl defending her feelings inside – the song is “little 15” and the first album it was recorded on is Music for the Masses.

    I used to “borrow” my older brother’s stereo and cassette tapes when I was home sick and he was at school; this had a significant influence on my musical tastes, and I continued to like DM well past the point where my brother had decided that they were gay. They probably are, but that doesn’t change the fact that I like their music….except for the last 3 or so albums that have come out, probably because Gahan has cut back on the heroin, which can be harmful to any band/singer/music artist. Terrible, I know, but it’s not always a “sid & nancy” thing at least.

    Like


  9. the only thing i can think of, and i doubt its right, is Santa as “Mannekin Pis” (Little Man Piss) statue in Brussels.

    also, i’m glad to see someone else who thinks strip clubs are pointless.

    Like


  10. Yep, that’s definitely it.

    I actually like the last 3 albums. A bit less Martin and a bit more Dave. Dave wants to be a real rock star while Martin is much more of the emo kid.

    I don’t think any of them are gay actually, but w/e.

    Like


  11. “To have and to hold” is another DM song – of course, it’s also part of traditional marital vows.

    Like


  12. The “ogling breasts” story is complete bullshit.

    It is fake but accurate

    Like


  13. I’m not rereading this to look for pop cult references. I’ve got things to do.

    Like


  14. Jesus Christ, now you’re repeating 10 year old internet rumors?

    Like


  15. @theoneandonly

    “You can’t do anything like that when discussing a woman’s beauty. You say a woman is a ten and someone else says she’s an eight, but how is it possible to prove or disprove either claim?”

    This site has several surveys with 10 photos of women, and the scores assigned to them by all contributors were remarkably similar. I won’t call it hard scientific proof, but it’s on the way to objective.

    @Rollory

    “The “ogling breasts” story is complete bullshit.”

    Sadly I would tend to agree. Doesn’t stop the theory being worth testing though – just in case.

    Like


  16. @ emclaren

    “I’m not rereading this to look for pop cult references. I’ve got things to do.”

    Clearly, which would explain why one of the first things you did today was check Roissy’s blog.

    @ Miley Cyrus

    “Jesus Christ, now you’re repeating 10 year old internet rumors?”

    F**k off.

    Like


  17. I volunteer to lead the study – need about 200 pairs of bodacious tatas for the next 12 months.. that should be a statistically significant sample.. bring on those DDs baby!

    Like


  18. on December 18, 2009 at 9:31 am unlearning genius

    “Men win the argument to win the group. Women win the group to win the argument”

    Much change in history has been achieved by contrarian men. Most women AND men are simply herd followers …These contrarian men actually led miserable lives and were oftentimes poor. They are the omegas and the lower betas that you usually make fun of.

    Women just respond to the in-crowd and always follow the herd (because it is the strategy with the least variance). Women will notice contrarian males only after they have succeeded.

    Like


  19. In order to conduct proper empirical science, they probably tried to find men that had never ogled breasts to use as a “control” group ; but not such men could be found.

    Like


  20. The primary pop-culture reference is UK slang: Roissy, like Santa, is ‘taking the piss’ – sometimes politely known as ‘taking the mick or mickey’.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taking_the_piss

    Like


  21. The ogling breasts story may be BS, but it’s such nice BS.

    Like


  22. Roissy, you discredit yourself with these remix of pop culture remix, of remix of the junk sciences. If you were serious, you’d dig deeper to discover the method flaws.

    Like


  23. It is said “all progress is made by unhappy/dissatisfied people”

    Men are raised/socialized (and likely naturally more/better inclined) to change things they aren’t happy with. Women tend to go along more.

    Like


  24. Roissy

    How does that old saying go? Men win the argument to win the group. Women win the group to win the argument.

    Old saying? That’s an Xsplat original. Correctly attributed by you in another of your posts.

    Like


  25. now you’re repeating 10 year old internet rumors?

    it makes me feel good about myself. so what? are you some rabid sexist who doesn´t accept that us men should have the right to put feelings ahead of reason, like women?

    Like


  26. They are the omegas and the lower betas that you usually make fun of.

    o m e g a s an betas are the by-product of decadent civilizations. they produce nothing, they add nothing, they invent nothing

    see David ALexander for a concise treatise about the sub-humaness of betas

    Like


  27. roissy cut the crap and answer the Test of your Game posts.

    It’s cool you have a new gf, but you can wait a few hours for another BJ dude.

    Like


  28. “Men win the argument to win the group. Women win the group to win the argument”

    God is this true. I’ve argued with a lot of other guys in my time, and if there are lots of women around, they get so turned on by the dominance displays of the winner that you can get a lot of sex afterward, particularly if you stayed aloof the whole time and they got fired up and frustrated.

    “Much change in history has been achieved by contrarian men. Most women AND men are simply herd followers …These contrarian men actually led miserable lives and were oftentimes poor. They are the omegas and the lower betas that you usually make fun of.”

    That Gutenburg was certainly a loser, and so was Archimedes, and so on and so forth. The flaw in your assertion is that only since recent times have the people who have been inventors and made major contributions to society been able to be poor and miserable. When you look at most of history, the only people educated enough to focus on screwing around with new ideas were the people rich enough to not have to work to survive and who had educations, this means nobility and upper class. Archimedes was the Cousin to the King of Syracuse, Aristotle got paid big bucks to teach Princes, Gutenburg was wealthy from his business and middle class origins (yes he almost spent all his money on the press, but the fact that he could totally stop working altogether to work on it for a few years indicates he had some in the bank).

    Only with the advent of free public education circa 1800’s have the poor been educated enough to make significant contributions, and then only with the grants and donations supplied by wealthier people who thought they were on to something. This still happens today with investors and start up companies.

    Like


  29. Bon Jovi?

    Like


  30. You know, the first study proves nothing.

    They got a bunch of undergraduates from the same school. That’s not exactly controlling for cultural influence here. Instead what it seems to be proving is– um, twenty-somethings from California all have the same ideas about beauty, more-or-less?

    Wow. All I’m saying is that society is one hell of a lurking variable.

    Now, if someone manages to prove that rainforest tribes who have never seen a television agree largely with the California teens about what makes beauty, I’ll agree with you. Not holding my breath.

    Like


  31. If looking at breasts extends your life, then I guess porn addicts will live forever.

    Like


  32. on December 18, 2009 at 1:30 pm gunslingergregi

    ”””””’Sadly I would tend to agree. Doesn’t stop the theory being worth testing though – just in case.”””””

    I agree the things we do in the name of science.

    Like


  33. on December 18, 2009 at 1:34 pm gunslingergregi

    ””””””Only with the advent of free public education circa 1800’s have the poor been educated enough to make significant contributions, and then only with the grants and donations supplied by wealthier people who thought they were on to something. This still happens today with investors and start up companies.””””””’

    It ain’t just grants and donations it is that the wealthy want a piece of your pie he he he

    The wealthy don’t only do charity work.

    Like


  34. ROSIE,

    You neurotic cretin, do i get to dildo fuck your mom in the arse?… yeah…your mom..that one…

    –BB

    Like


  35. There’s a saying that goes: 9 out of 10 chicks in San Diego are hot…and the 10th goes to UCSD.

    Like


  36. “Men win the argument to win the group.”

    Boy, is this true. I live in ultra-leftist Seattle, and have developed something I call “Adolph Hitler Game”*. Basically, it’s nothing more than talking about how the bottom 20 percent IQers, the chronically unemployed and criminal should be sterilized or forced to undergo abortions. But you gotta do it casually, sorta like you’re wiping a bug you just squished off the bottom of your shoe., so, it only works if you have uber-frame control. Develop a good sneer. One of my faves is claiming that I give to charity, namely, Project Prevention, which pays poor and stupid women to get sterilized (ok, that’s a little bit of a stretch, but whatever).

    Unfortunately, Asian women are the most receptive, which is worthless since I’m not so much into asians

    * No, I have no Jew issues. The terms nazi and Hitler have been so abused that they, effectively, mean nothing today.

    Like


  37. If you’re really ballsy try busting out with “The nazis were wrong about the Jews and right about the Gypsies”, followed by noting all the problems that Gypsies are creating in Italy today. Calls for genocide of really annoying population groups is gold, if you can pull it off.

    This reminds me that Roissy’s measure of alpha-ness, the number of women who want to fuck a man, is entirely passive on the male side. I would submit that the most alpha thing a man can do is kill, and this is certainly confirmed by all the death row and Death Roy groupies.

    Heh, there’s another pop culture reference. Anyone see it?

    Like


  38. I very literally laughed out loud at Roissy’s sarcastic use of

    “This has aided me when walking back from lovers’ apartments at 2 AM through >>>>vibrant neighborhoods<<<<."

    Awesome. For the functionally retarded SWPL-ers out there who just might be reading this blog, Roissy is making fun of you and NAMs.

    Like


  39. on December 18, 2009 at 3:19 pm Dr. Grzlickson

    How do you pronounce “roissy”?

    Like


  40. Staring at clits is healthier

    Like


  41. on December 18, 2009 at 3:26 pm Marcus Aureliette

    Gutenburg was wealthy from his business and middle class origins (yes he almost spent all his money on the press, but the fact that he could totally stop working altogether to work on it for a few years indicates he had some in the bank).

    And then he was bankrupted by his partner. Doh!

    Like


  42. Does the second reference have anything to do with Art Spiegelman?

    Like


  43. I have seen several studies indicating that men – across cultures and locations – are remarkably consistent in agreeing on what makes a woman attractive. Enough to think thee is a solid science basis for saying so.

    Like


  44. km: Link, please.

    Also, remember that Western culture has been fairly pervasive in the past twenty or so years– globalization and all. It’s perfectly possible that everyone is getting the same sexual conditioning.

    Like


  45. ozy – I didn’t say I had seen them today, or yesterday – but rather over the last 50 years. I don’t have links, and don’t care enough to look for any. Try “Google” or “Bing”.

    At least one of them included a review of artistic renderings over many centuries – so it wasn’t just the impact of TV/magazines. No, I don’t have a link to it.

    Like


  46. David Buss at UT:Austin did a 37 culture study that had over 10,000 participants in regards to mating. This was one of the landmark studies that found that across the species people typically want the same thing in a mate.

    You can find a book he published all about these finding on Amazon.com, it’s called “The Evolution of Desire”. It’s written for the intelligent layman, so most readers of this blog can pick it right up and have no problems reading it.

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/046500802X/qid=1057091018/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-5145576-9560159?v=glance&s=books

    Like


  47. Thank you, Luthor. I’ll have to check it out.

    Like


  48. Boob story is the second obscure pop culture reference.

    Like


  49. Yep, they avoid computer science because they hate betas and omegas:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34437233/ns/technology_and_science-science/

    Like


  50. Here comes Conor Friedersdorf back for more:

    In Defense of Pretty Lies

    Like


  51. on December 18, 2009 at 7:38 pm Epoxytocin No. 87

    @ Lupo

    From that article:
    There was a subset of women in the study who didn’t view the stereotypical objects as masculine and geeky and aren’t turned off by the associated office or classroom.

    …from which they conclude:
    “That tells me that it’s a cultural phenomenon,” Cheryan told LiveScience. “These objects are not inherently masculine or geeky; they’ve been constructed that way. That means to me we can reconstruct the objects or more importantly the whole field.”

    Cheryan added one way to change the lopsided field would be, “broadening the image of computer science to make it so that other people feel a connection to the field.”

    The worst part is that these people are actually serious. The Occam’s Razor explanation – that the correlation between the CS interest and the geeky objects is not a coincidence – is apparently lost on them.

    Hmm, what’s that you say? People who gamble big money are more likely to take other large risks, too? Shit, must be a problem with the way our culture perceives gambling culture. We need to broaden the field of gambling so that nice, stable, paragons of moderation are suddenly motivated to become big bettors.

    What’s next, changing math so that wrong answers can be considered correct if they’re “intuitive” enough? Sadly enough, that doesn’t even seem extreme anymore.

    Like


  52. If 10 minutes of staring at big round tits is equivalent to a 30 minute jog, what does one hour of titty fucking equal? A triathlon?

    Staring at a pussy must even better for me than staring at big tits!

    Like


  53. The older I get, the more I appreciate big, perfect tits.
    If they have nice large aerola, its even better.

    Breast implants, another great invention, was also discovered by yet another white male, Vincez Czerney, a Austrian-German. Here is a wikipedia page about breast implants with a few pictures of before/after shots,
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_implant
    They were attempted first back in 1895. Just think, we were thinking about making tits bigger and better about the same time the Wright brothers were inventing flight, showing conclusively that before suffrage our priorities were in a better order.

    I know…….Im insensitive. Its like a gift.

    Like


  54. Been scanning the archives for a couple days now. I find this site interesting, but a bit disheartening; someone is building their whole lifestyle on what is essentially ‘brainwashing’ the opposite sex. Increasing perceived value, making the ‘target’ question their status thereby raising your own. Etc,etc. And I find a lot of derogatory remarks aimed at women, which leads me to wonder why you would spend so much time attempting to gain their affections and respect. Nonetheless, I love to question things. I don’t think there is a pat answer for why society functions the way it does. Even though I completely disagree with some of the posts I’ve read, I can (begrudgingly) accept the validity of others. A large part of me thinks that much of the value placed on being alpha is coming the male himself. I have experiences to share and would love to analyze my own behavior. I’ll wait for appropriate posts.

    This post: I’ve been hearing a lot about facial symmetry and attractiveness. It would be great to run a picture through a web based program that would tell you just how far off the mark you are. 🙂
    As far as the last statement that you made; men tend react to situations of conflict with anger due to higher levels of testosterone. Perhaps that also tears at the the body politic of the nation.?
    I do find it slightly amusing that Woman’s suffrage is brought up in a negative light after the coy comment about ‘men achieving 99% of history’s accomplishments.’ You obviously feel as though men are inherently superior, so I question why you feel threatened by the progression of the womens movement.
    Like the site. Could do without the little digs. They tend to breed disdain.
    The humor and comments are great. Will keep reading.
    -SSF

    Like


  55. a similar theory is called Circles of Prominence, a plastic surgeon named Dr. Young uses integer units of IRIS size to set optimal facial features when setting up plastic surgery in females.

    So the ideal distance between the upper lip and the bottom of the nostril is exactly 1 iris size. Also the bottom lip should be exactly the same size as 1 iris size. The various facial features should be integer multiples of iris size. The distance between the eyes being optimal if exactly the same size as the half width of the face and so on. The idea being that based on research, the eye spends a significant amount of time tracing the eye area of other individuals when assessing beauty. They set up sensors to watch people’s eyes to get this. The one unit of geometry that he theorizes is the basic yard stick is the size of the Iris.

    Like


  56. Epoxy

    Hmm, what’s that you say? People who gamble big money are more likely to take other large risks, too? Shit, must be a problem with the way our culture perceives gambling culture.

    Epoxy, women are socialists. Commies to the bone. Gossip is so ingrained in them, that they actually think that gossip is at the root of reality. That reality is 100% socially created.

    Try to talking to a female anthropologist. She’ll explain it to you.

    Like


  57. Two comments in moderation. One about attribution for “How does that old saying go? Men win the argument to win the group. Women win the group to win the argument.” One about women being essentially commies due to their gossipy nature.

    Like


  58. Shespitsshit
    The progression of the womens movement will turn the Western World into a society resembling sub-Saharan Africa. That may or may not look like a threat to you (for most women, it would be an electric gina-tingle). But some of us will mourn the transformation.

    Like


  59. Hello folks,

    Quick question —

    I realize this is ‘so 90s’, but how many people, if any, would be interested in a joint Roissysphere/HBD/MRA/Game chatroom via Mibbit IRC?

    Like


  60. Now that I think of it, I rescind my request for attribution for “Men win the argument to win the group. Women win the group to win the argument.” I’d prefer it be thought of as an old saying. That would be the way to get it to become an old saying.

    Like


  61. See if this gets through moderation – response to epoxytocin: Women are socialists. Gossip is so ingrained in them, that they actually think that gossip is at the root of reality. That reality is 100% socially created.

    Try to talking to a female anthropologist. She’ll explain it to you.

    Like


  62. Damned moderation.

    Women, even and especially educated women, actually believe that reality is socially created. I think it’s because they are born with the innate propensity to gossip, and so wind up feeling that what the group thinks is what matters most. What reality is.

    Talk to a female anthropology major about this. They are nuts. They believe culture creates facts. Not just interpretation of facts.

    Like


  63. Ogling at breasts may not necessarily extend a man’s life expectancy , but it sure makes life that little bit more worth living.

    Like


  64. Rum;
    I’m assuming you are a republican. We could very well be taking about slavery circa the 1800s.
    A woman’s place in society is 2nd tier and the world has been going to hell for a long time now. You can argue that liberation may play a factor in the ‘breakdown’ of traditional society but to claim causation of societal decline is rather silly, no?
    Take credit, pass blame. Next.

    Perhaps I shouldn’t be so surprised to see such blatent mysogyny on a PUA blog..but somehow it seems ironic.

    Anyways I’d rather not get into a battle of words because it’s pointless. We are both entitled to our viewpoints on the matter.
    And I prefer whiskey. ;D

    Regarding original post; I wonder how this plays out in the animal kingdom. Perhaps an aniamal’s coat pattern could be a factor in attractiveness. Although I think scent may weigh more heavily.

    Like


  65. The defining characteristic of Sub Sharan society is that the females are economically independent of males. IE, raising agriculture is so easy, anyone can do it.
    So, who do the females fuck when they have a completely un-encumbered-by-need-for-support choice?
    The thing speaks for itself.

    Like


  66. shespitsfire , you need to read the book, The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition into the Forces of History by Howard Bloom.
    http://www.amazon.com/Lucifer-Principle-Scientific-Expedition-History/dp/0871136643/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261193993&sr=1-1

    Like


  67. Since women believe what they want to believe, what suits their personal and group agendas, I don’t think it’s fruitful to argue with them.

    They are rarely swayed by rational arguments. They use rationality only to rationalize what it is that they want to believe.

    So strategy when swaying women’s views is to use 10% rational argument, 40% mood and body language in presentation, 40% associating the view you want to get accross with other views that she already accepts and feels positive about, and another 10% being funny and cocky. Women will judge the overall presentation and presentor more than than the details.

    And for the most part, live a lifestyle in which women don’t have to agree with you – that is, have power in the physical and legal realm, and don’t give up power to women and women’s groups. Have your money safe, don’t get married, be higher status than your mate if you can, have your mate financially better off with you than without, if you can, etc.

    Like


  68. God damned moderation – this is getting irritating. Roissy, you might consider migrating your blog away from the wordpress domain so that you can better control the moderation settings. No one has any way of knowing what are moderation triggers, and wordpress has them totally out of control at this point.

    [editor: yeah, i’m thinking about migrating, if for no other reason than i could use a change of virtual scenery.]

    Like


  69. …So strategy when swaying women’s views is to use 10% rational argument, 40% mood and body language in presentation, 40% associating the view you want to get accross with other views that she already accepts and feels positive about, and another 10% being funny and cocky. Women will judge the overall presentation and presentor more than than the details.

    Like


  70. (WTF? First comment stuck in moderation…..)

    “I’ve got to have and to hold the goods.”

    Roissy must be banging that chic with the black fingernail polish again……Two Depeche Mode (pop culture) references in this post. Like the first reference mentioned above (Little 15) the second is also a song from “Music For The Masses”: “To Have And To Hold”. Good Depeche Mode song and album, but Violator is still my favorite DM album….gay or not.

    [editor: you win, sir. here is your golden ticket…. to poon! yes DM is a little ghey but they make good song.]

    Like


  71. Not familiar with the author but will check it out C. Thank you for that!
    Rum. I can’t speak for their society or why the idea of idependence is troublesome. I’m not sure who they are fucking. Frankly, I don’t care. For myself; I am able bodied and I can’t reject my work ethic or let a man do all of the work. Earning my own money and paying for half of what my man and I aquire only seems fair to him and myself.

    Like


  72. SPS
    OK, You are very new here. You have read little and assumed much. You are, like, not the first.

    Like


  73. on December 18, 2009 at 11:18 pm aussie girl in australia

    so where is Roissy these days? Just seems the blog posts are becoming fewer and fewer.

    Like


  74. Not sure if that was aimed at me; SSF.
    That was a low blow 🙂
    I would like to learn more.
    (But from those who seek to gain nothing).
    And I’m quite certain that I know and have experienced more than you realize.
    I can’t say we will always agree on everything but I’m all ears.

    Like


  75. Spread your ears.

    Like


  76. on December 19, 2009 at 8:47 am almost 40 year old virgin

    Healthy booby-oggling, man(&cow-fart)-made global warming.
    It just have to be uttered by a scientist or “expert”.
    And all the sheeple fall for it.

    Big news.

    “Scientific” studies are mostly a waste of time and money(tax payer) anyway. This one sounded at least amusing.

    Like


  77. on December 19, 2009 at 8:58 am the one and only

    Jim, on the way to objective? Not even close. Weight is objective. Height is objective. Temperature is objective. Beauty is not.

    gig: “o m e g a s an betas are the by-product of decadent civilizations. they produce nothing, they add nothing, they invent nothing”

    So PUAs are the engines of civilization whereas “betas” like scientists and engineers produce nothing, add nothing and invent nothing. Makes perfect sense!

    Like


  78. “According to Dr. Karen Weatherby, a gerontologist and author of the study, gawking at women’s breasts is a healthy practice…”

    A GERONTOLOGIST? Selection bias. Obviously, men who have boobs to stare at in their dotage are wealthier and generally more successful than those who don’t. Such men would live longer regardless of whether or not they stared at boobs.

    It’s like saying that wine drinking promotes health. It doesn’t (alcohol is a poison), but in America the cognitive elites are more likely than the proles to drink wine. The lower orders tend towards beer. Wine consumption is just a proxy for wealth, IQ, good genes and other things that for very good reasons correlate with health. Those people are not healthy BECAUSE they drink wine. If they stopped drinking wine, they’d probably become even healthier. And if a crack whore added wine to her normal repertoire, she’d simply drop dead a little earlier than she would have otherwise.

    Like


  79. on December 19, 2009 at 1:13 pm It's My First Day

    I stopped by hoping for a post on “blizzard game” and am leaving disappointed.

    Like


  80. on December 19, 2009 at 1:14 pm a very attractive woman

    Why 99.9% of history’s accomplishments have been achieved by men:

    Don’t forget 99.9% of the fuckups too.

    Like


  81. on December 19, 2009 at 1:37 pm finsalscollons

    “Why 99.9% of history’s accomplishments have been achieved by men:

    Don’t forget 99.9% of the fuckups too.”

    Yes, if you don’t do anything, you cannot fuck up anything. It is easier to seat by the side, whining and criticizing someone who does something and benefitting from the efforts of other people.

    If it was for women, we still be living in caves. Very cute caves with gorgeous curtains, of course.

    Like


  82. “God damned moderation”

    Tell me about it, I had a comment completely disappear from moderation the other day. Just writing now to see if this makes it to the light of day.

    Like


  83. Since the last post made it (so far) I’ll just make the observation that whatever Roissy thinks science is saying, real life is taking massive dumps on some profile extra-marital-poon hounds.

    There’s Tiger Woods disintegration, probable divorce and massive reduction of wealth (not so much from the divorce than from being PR poison for golf at present).

    Meanwhile, Silvio was apparently a lot more shook up than he let on at being smashed in the face in public.

    Like


  84. Another post just went into moderation, wonder if it’ll ever make it out.

    Like


  85. @ xsplat: You don’t even need the 10% rational argument.

    @ Roissy: I reckon you’ve been flagged again and wordpress is starting to pay more attention to you. Given how pc wordpress is I’m surprised your blog hasn’t been shut down already.

    Like


  86. Don’t forget 99.9% of the fuckups too.

    not to mention that it was the 99,9% of fuck ups that got women’s ginas tingling

    Like


  87. ”””””aussie girl in australia
    so where is Roissy these days? Just seems the blog posts are becoming fewer and fewer.
    ””””””

    Come on now the dude hasn’t taken a vacation from blogging longer than a week in like 3 years and making no loot. Why don’t ya send him a nice fat check to help his creative juices.

    Like


  88. on December 21, 2009 at 11:45 am a very attractive woman

    finsalscollons

    If it was for women, we still be living in caves. Very cute caves with gorgeous curtains, of course.

    So you apparently agree with me that if men are responsible for 99.9% of historical ‘accomplishments’ that they must also be responsible for 99.9% of the historical fuckups? Just want to be clear on that.

    Like


  89. Your so proud of that comeback you said it twice good lord.

    Like


  90. on December 22, 2009 at 4:26 am msexceptiontotherule

    Would this be a good time to mention that a good bra is going to be the best defense in the war with time, no matter how small or large a woman’s breasts may be?

    Wait…just did that (see above) anyway.

    Proper skin-moisturizing is also part of the arsenal, and these are best started by no later than age 20 for maximum benefit.

    Like


  91. The mathematics of beauty has been around for ages. I remember seeing documentaries about it while still in high school.

    http://www.beautyanalysis.com/index2_mba.htm

    This is the website of the researcher who came across it. Apparently the ratio is the same factor found in the Fibonacci series. Very interesting material.

    Someone mentioned the alpha-ness in being measured as how many women want to be with a man. Eh, I’m not as convinced anymore, especially after reading Jane Goodall’s studies on chimpanzees, with whom we share 99% of genetic material.

    The alpha crown was awarded to chimps by other males and it was not based off a chimps sexual attraction to the females. The crown is either usurped by force or earned amongst his male peers.

    It was the beta chimps that had to learn seduction in order to steal them away from the alphas (who had female access as a perk to the position).

    A more scientifically accurate measure of alpha-ness could be a quantification of a man’s standing amongst other men, which would most likely not be the interest of men wanting to learn game and consistently frame things in a certain context.

    Like


  92. Thanks for a brilliant read. keep it up.

    Like