|
Fat
Oct 3, 2009 1:06:45 GMT -5
Post by palaver on Oct 3, 2009 1:06:45 GMT -5
What, huh? Hello? What'd I miss? Love them. It's your patriotic duty.
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 3, 2009 6:52:55 GMT -5
Post by Subuatai on Oct 3, 2009 6:52:55 GMT -5
catgirlYeah I think I did too, sorry @sweetflatulence It's a humorous article citing no sources from any psychological research and is full of other interesting "truths" such as "Having sons reduces the likelihood of divorce", "Beautiful people have more daughters", "It's natural for politicians to risk everything for an affair (but only if they're male)", etc lol!
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 4, 2009 16:40:34 GMT -5
Post by toyomansi on Oct 4, 2009 16:40:34 GMT -5
I don't think people from cultures where they barely see any white people in their lives (and with little western media influence) would automatically find a blonde, blue-eyed woman attractive... they would maybe see her as an alien at first, lol ^^ different cultures have different beauty standards, but are today being influenced by western media and "told" what's pretty and what's not.
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 5, 2009 19:06:47 GMT -5
Post by milkman's baby on Oct 5, 2009 19:06:47 GMT -5
It's a humorous article citing no sources from any psychological research and is full of other interesting "truths" such as "Having sons reduces the likelihood of divorce", "Beautiful people have more daughters", "It's natural for politicians to risk everything for an affair (but only if they're male)", etc lol! It was from Psychology Today, which is a well-established psychology research periodical written by psychologists and researchers, most of whom have PhDs. The magazine does not want to kill it's reputation, so I'm sure the citations of specific research and experiments could be found somewhere on the website, I'm just too lazy to look. It sounds like you're just rejecting the evidence because you yourself don't fit the generalization. lol Can't you just accept that you have a minority opinion Subs?
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 5, 2009 19:36:11 GMT -5
Post by palaver on Oct 5, 2009 19:36:11 GMT -5
^Psychology Today is pop psychology bordering on self help. It's cute, but it's still fluff.
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 5, 2009 20:05:41 GMT -5
Post by Subuatai on Oct 5, 2009 20:05:41 GMT -5
Toyomansi and Palaver has nailed it! Btw happy Bday Toyomansi!
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 5, 2009 20:10:08 GMT -5
Post by milkman's baby on Oct 5, 2009 20:10:08 GMT -5
^ Psychology Today is pop psychology bordering on self help. It's cute, but it's still fluff. Still written by professionals. May be overhyped, but not an outright lie. Regardless, it would be interesting to look into the validity of the article I posted.
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 5, 2009 20:15:15 GMT -5
Post by Subuatai on Oct 5, 2009 20:15:15 GMT -5
Unless I see that particular article's source with a survey conducted outside of America and all across the rest of the world saying "Blondes = best" I would say the only possible validity of that article is within the states hun
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 5, 2009 20:40:20 GMT -5
Post by palaver on Oct 5, 2009 20:40:20 GMT -5
It's probably too late. She's already dying it blonde.
Just remember the eyebrows. They should be a lighter shade--and not too arched like a cartoon. Letting you roots show kinda has the opposite effect, so keep on it. If you can stay blonde, I guess that means you can take care of yourself, but it can also imply that you're high maintenance.
Personally, I like black. It's gives a woman more yin, or femininity.
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 6, 2009 5:41:53 GMT -5
Post by Subuatai on Oct 6, 2009 5:41:53 GMT -5
LOL!
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 6, 2009 10:56:32 GMT -5
Post by betahat on Oct 6, 2009 10:56:32 GMT -5
It was a bit odd that the four leaders of the four big parties in the last Canadian election all had blue eyes. There is something mesmerizing there. You would probably find a disproportionate number of blue eyes in Hollywood too. I guess I'm a little skeptical that it would be the universal standard of beauty. But here's a recent article by nice white racist/nationalist that cites some genetic evidence: majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/the_evolution_of_blond_hair_and_blue_eyes_among_nordics/I especially love the digs against the ugliness of mixed race individuals versus genetically "pure" nordics. The discussion thread is also fascinating, including a debate between an outright racist and a sort-of racist (married to an Indian woman) about whether Aishwarya Rai is hot or looks like a man. Fortunately for me, my mother has blonde hair and blue eyes. Anyone remember Big Trouble in Little China and the legend of the Chinese woman with green eyes? The Chinese have always been a little funny, what with preferring silver to gold for a long time. Maybe they like green eyes more?
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 6, 2009 13:33:11 GMT -5
Post by milkman's baby on Oct 6, 2009 13:33:11 GMT -5
It's probably too late. She's already dying it blonde. Just remember the eyebrows. They should be a lighter shade--and not too arched like a cartoon. Letting you roots show kinda has the opposite effect, so keep on it. If you can stay blonde, I guess that means you can take care of yourself, but it can also imply that you're high maintenance. Personally, I like black. It's gives a woman more yin, or femininity. Almost, except I ran outta peroxide from Walmart about half way through, so I'll just have to settle for the trailer trash chic look. Look for me on the next season of Rock of Love. I'm surprised it's mostly males objecting so strongly in here, whereas I thought it would stir up more of a commotion amongst dark-haired females. It personally didn't phase me either way, as I don't care about those things any more than I care about women with longer toes being more desirable. Then again, I'm not really a good example of the average female's input/opinion, but the point is the article brought to light many ideas that could be true. Betahat: That discussion forum was definitely amusing. Sometimes I like to read discussions from Stormfront just to entertain myself and see what "the other side" is thinking. I would totally join that forum just to lurk if it weren't for the fact that I'm too lazy (a lazy ethnic, that is) to fill out the registration forms. I came across one post from a user claiming that races were not intended to mix by nature because it is natural for parents to select a partner that looks similar enough to them, without being blood-related or incestuous, so that the children would be "recognizable by the community." Contrast that with the opposite end, in which you often hear many "mixed-race supremacists" claiming mixed race individuals are by nature considered more attractive because the blending of two extremes gives off the impression they are more healthy (and once again, health = fertility). The more historically-oriented mixed race supremacist might argue that throughout history, heterogeneity has benefitted most cultures and therefore a mixed child would be superior. www.independent.co.uk/news/science/the-face-of-the-future-why-eurasians-are-changing-the-rules-of-attraction-523076.htmlI've said it before and I'll say it again: don't shoot the messenger.
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 6, 2009 19:06:06 GMT -5
Post by betahat on Oct 6, 2009 19:06:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 6, 2009 20:07:48 GMT -5
Post by milkman's baby on Oct 6, 2009 20:07:48 GMT -5
theblacksentinel.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/anorexic2pl.jpgI like the jacket. Naw but I'm not grossed out by anorexics as long as they have clothes on. It's when I see the pelvises that I start to get queezy in the stomach. I know some people are just naturally thin and can't help it just like some people are naturally obese, but bones...ahhh.
|
|
|
Fat
Oct 7, 2009 1:24:58 GMT -5
Post by helles on Oct 7, 2009 1:24:58 GMT -5
^ eww. that is truly vile. how is she still able to walk and breath and just.. live?
|
|