Conversation

Notices

1. mkultra (mkultra@wolfgirl.bar)'s status on Sunday, 06-Aug-2023 04:57:51 JST mkultra

   • Hollyjollytailspike
   • Woggy's Zeonic Frolicks
   • :njp:Dadbol:njp:
   • GabeLakmann
   • billy_hughes
   @billy_hughes @GabeLakmann @Dadbolgainz @WashedOutGundamPilot @monsterislandcolonizer
   OK but this was also the norm in continental europe, which was orders of magnitude poorer.
   
   This trend is also normal for the middle ages.
   
   I'm asking Gabe to explain what happened, and the closest he's come is the usual gish gallop about africans.
   
   Also if you don't think there were environmental pressures on people in the 1800s you are objectively retarded.
   • mkultra (mkultra@wolfgirl.bar)'s status on Sunday, 06-Aug-2023 05:33:44 JST mkultra

     in reply to

     • Hollyjollytailspike
     • Woggy's Zeonic Frolicks
     • :njp:Dadbol:njp:
     • GabeLakmann
     • billy_hughes
     @billy_hughes @GabeLakmann @Dadbolgainz @WashedOutGundamPilot @monsterislandcolonizer
     Gabe is attempting to assert hypergamy is eugenic, unsuccessfully.
   • GabeLakmann (gabelakmann@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Sunday, 06-Aug-2023 05:33:44 JST GabeLakmann

     in reply to

     • Hollyjollytailspike
     • Woggy's Zeonic Frolicks
     • :njp:Dadbol:njp:
     • billy_hughes
     Hypergamy is eugenics. You're just mad/jealous/whatever that your traits (being a whiner and a quitter) aren't what is being selected for.
     
     Hypergamy states that most all of the women go for the top percentage of men (men that have desirable traits for women which is looks, resources, or a combination of the two) and that some or many men get left out. This means men born without good looks, men not smart enough to make decent money, or men without a combination of the two will have less success in having children.
     
     Men who give up will have no success in having children.
   • billy_hughes (billy_hughes@poa.st)'s status on Sunday, 06-Aug-2023 05:33:45 JST billy_hughes

     in reply to

     • Hollyjollytailspike
     • Woggy's Zeonic Frolicks
     • :njp:Dadbol:njp:
     • GabeLakmann
     @mkultra @GabeLakmann @Dadbolgainz @WashedOutGundamPilot @monsterislandcolonizer I just had a look at the thread to understand the argument.
     I'm making the point in argument to mongoose that very little occurred in the 1800s to induce any sort of mutation in White Americans.
     I believe you chaps (Gabe and Mongoose) are arguing about girls in some way and their behaviour today being shaped from some generations ago.
     Do I have this correct?
   • BroDrillard (brodrillard@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Sunday, 06-Aug-2023 05:34:08 JST BroDrillard

     in reply to

     • Hollyjollytailspike
     • Woggy's Zeonic Frolicks
     • :njp:Dadbol:njp:
     • GabeLakmann
     • billy_hughes
     It's nuanced. Remember the peacock's tail. It is a display of male health, but doesn't improve survival.
     
     There might be similar characteristics among women's present top male choices.