The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Lance Welton Archive
Can We Judge People By What They Look Like? In Fact, Yes
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Unless it involves mocking President Trump’s supposedly “small hands,” there is nothing that horrifies our multiculturalist masters more than judging by appearances.

It is impossible, they claim, to infer anything about how someone is likely to behave by their gender or because they are from a particular ethnic group. Everyone is unique (but also, somehow, equal). Judging by appearances is not just superficial but plain evil.

It will be fascinating to see what they’ll make of the recently-published book by British academic Dr. Edward Dutton titled How To Judge People By What They Look Like, which argues that even within races and sexes you can, with a fair degree of accuracy, infer people’s personalities from appearances. You may even get an inside track on how smart they are by taking a good look at their physical characteristics, according to Dutton.

“You can’t judge people by what they look like! It’s drummed into us as children,” writes Dutton, an adjunct professor of anthropology at Oulu University in northern Finland. “It is utterly false.”

But Dutton makes a provocative case for resurrecting the ancient art of physiognomy—judging character from the face. He argues it should never have been dismissed as pseudo-science.

Indeed, his research goes way beyond making inferences from the face. He writes:

We are evolved to judge people’s psychology from what they look like; we can accurately work out people’s personality and intelligence from how they look, and (quite often) we have to if we want to survive. Body shape, hairiness, eye width, finger length, even how big a woman’s breasts are . . . these and much else are windows into personality, intelligence or both.

The Left would have you believe that this kind of research is on the extreme fringes of the academy; relegated to low-impact journals no serious scholar would read.

But, as Dutton says in his book, the relevant research has been published in top psychology journals, such as Intelligence, Personality and Individual Differences and Evolutionary Psychological Science, as has his own research. This includes a study asserting that atheists tend to be less physically attractive and more likely to be left-handed than religious people and that they have objectively worse skin.

Dutton, ever the evolutionist, opines that this is because we have been selected to be religious over thousands of years of evolution. Hence, those who are atheists reflect mutant genes in the brain and people with mental mutations are more likely to have physical ones. This explains their asymmetrical features and asymmetrical brains, leading to left-handedness.

Dutton’s book leaves no stone unturned and could potentially offend anyone except the archetypal Mr. Perfect. But science is not meant to care about offending people, and this is rather refreshing.

Presented in witty style, Dutton marshals evidence in support of his theory that different body types correlate with different personalities. People who are muscular, with long legs and arms, are prone to be aggressive and selfish. They reflect a “fast Life History Strategy” i n adapting to an unstable environment in which you must live fast and die young. In such an environment, the personality of your partner isn’t important—you just want lots of healthy offspring. So, people invest energy in large secondary sexual characteristics—big muscles, large breasts—in order to advertise their genetic quality. This takes energy away from a more complex brain, so—in personality terms—they’re more animal-like.

In fact, this short book (less than 100 pages) will allow you to quickly read people in social situations and be right far more often than not, as long as a number of physical markers all point in the same psychological direction.

For example: Large-breasted women, according to Dutton’s theory, are more aggressive and selfish than their flat chested friends. One study of 144 women at University of Illinois found that large breast size was found to have a significant positive correlation with being “undersocialized,” undependable, impulsive, “psychologically minded” (that is introspective), flexible and adventurous. Women with large buttocks were found to be introverted, self-abasing, and high in guilt. In other words, they were relatively low in extraversion and relatively high in aspects of neuroticism. [Attribution of choice, by I. Steiner, 1980. In Fishbein, M. (Ed). Progress in Social Psychology, Volume I. Psychology Press.]

Another study, involving 95 male subjects, found that men who like small breasts tend toward being religious and depressive, and men who like larger buttocks are ordered, dependent, and “self-blaming.” [Correlates of heterosexual somatic preference, by J. Wiggins, N. Wiggins and J. Conger, 1968, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10: 82-89.]

Among many other insights, Dutton notes that taller men are generally smarter than shorter men, because women have sexually selected both for intelligence and height. Intelligence gives men status and resources while height typically makes them better at winning fights and protecting the woman.

Intelligent people, he says, also have longer, less baby-like faces and longer noses. When developmental pathways in the brain are damaged, he explains, it is reflected in smaller noses, closer-together eyes, and short faces—as in Downs Syndrome and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.

It follows, he asserts, that even minor problems in these pathways will be reflected in the face in the same kind of way, just more subtly.

There is so much in this little book to get your head around. Dutton even looks in detail into how hair color and skin complexion (controlling for race) can be successfully used to infer personality.

Dutton briefly explores race differences in evolved behavior, highlighting the evidence that blacks will tend to be the most aggressive, northeast Asians the opposite and whites intermediate.

However, he stresses that most of his findings only work within races. A broad face, for example, is associated with high testosterone and thus aggressiveness within a race. But this is not the case between races, because a broad face is also an adaptation to extreme cold. This means that it is found among the broad faced, but low testosterone, northeast Asians. However, among northeast Asians a broader face is a marker of higher testosterone.

This book makes a solid attempt to debunk the Leftist taboo on extending Darwinian theory to humans. Dark-mane lions are more aggressive, so are dark-haired and dark-skinned people, because dark coloring reflects testosterone, Dutton says.

It seems counter-intuitive that such a significant amount can be judged from appearances but there are clearly a growing group of academics who concur. Professor Bruce Charlton, Reader in Evolutionary Psychiatry at Newcastle University in England, writes the forward that : “Dr. Dutton’s book is a necessary corrective to misleading modern myths and taboos about ‘judgmentalism’ and stereotyping. As he makes clear . . . it is reasonable and sensible to take seriously our innate ability to sum-up a stranger with a glance.’”

Once you read this book, you’ll never look at people the same again. Though, if you know they’ve read it, you may feel paranoid about what they’re thinking about you.

Dutton doesn’t sugar-coat his findings, often presenting them in stark terms. Which brings up what we’re all waiting for, his assessment of the current occupant of the White House:

Hairy, muscular, long-limbed, bald men, with wide faces and narrow eyes are more aggressive and have lower impulse control. President Trump typifies this.

Sound about right?

Lance Welton [Email him] is the pen name of a freelance journalist living in New York.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Science • Tags: Face Shape, Faces 
Hide 136 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Svigor says:

    which argues that even within races and sexes you can, with a fair degree of accuracy, infer people’s personalities from appearances.

    Science catches up with me again.

    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    , @Anonymous
  2. While there are manuals and research that provide information of the requirements of Plants to thrive, and manuals on requirements of different animals to thrive, our rulers and their minions steadfast resolve to criminalize recognition of different races and their unique requirements to thrive prevents (moreover outlaws) discussion of the truth unless done behind close doors using a whisper. It is this issue that is causing increasing loss of legitamacy of these people.

    Acknowledgement of different races that have different requirements to thrive is essential to understanding the human condition. We ought have a manual not unlike the following but for humans:

    To do so would be inherently racist, or put differently inherently truthful. Why must we wallow in ignorance or accept the psychological battery of our minds by those who seek to rule over us at all costs? It is downright un-American!

    Zoos keep the different types of animals separate, they could just put the polar bears in with the grizzly bears and make a lot of commercials on TV about how they are increasing diversity by showing these different bears mating and living together, but even the low IQ might say “Hey wait a minute, aren’t they telling us they are increasing diversity while actually decreasing it?”

  3. anarchyst says:

    We would have been better off allowing true “freedom of association” to exist rather than imposing government enforced “public accommodation” on businesses and individuals. Yes, there was segregation, but, so what? There still is segregation today…

    In pre-civil-rights (for some) days, blacks were progressing just fine on their own “content of their character” and would have helped end much segregation on their own by their own actions.

    The “in your face” enforcement of unconstitutional “civil-rights (for some)” laws and statutes has done more to set back the cause of true “civil-rights” (which includes “freedom of association”) for all.

    Look at the mess we have now, every perverted group is now demanding their “civil-rights” starting with homosexuals, cross-dressers, and (soon to be legalized) pedophilia and polygamy…

    We should have left well-enough alone…

    We are paying for these misguided “civil-rights (for some)” laws now…

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  4. Gordo says:

    He’s gone as far as he can. If we went the whole way with what he knows there would have been no book.

    Also possibly no job any more and even maybe a prison sentence.

    • Replies: @Mishra
  5. dearieme says:

    Does he say anything about age?

    “A man’s face is his autobiography. A woman’s face is her work of fiction.” Oscar Wilde

  6. But the President isn’t bald. He’s certainly tall, but a slim man turned fat rather than muscular. I haven’t seen a picture of his bare chest but he doesn’t look very hairy to me. And his nose isn’t long, in fact, rather short. In fact, as a young man he was baby-faced. And when talking broad or long face, how can it be both? How can the Chinese have the blackest hair AND broad faces but low testosterone? How come I have a 3 SD iq and a little button nose? And all the people I know with higher iq’s than me are so short? I don’t know a single tall genius, but lotsa short ones, and they aren’t very successful, either, as a rule. What about Jewish people? They have long noses, all right, but look how short — oh, I give up.

  7. dearieme says:
    @Red Pill Angel

    You know lots of geniuses? You must have adopted a remarkably catholic definition of a genius.

    • Replies: @Cato
  8. Nor really genuises. Just people with high IQ. They walk among us.

  9. Dutton’s book is probably interesting, and I may have to read it to find out what I missed from this review. But Dutton’s thesis points out yet another reason for tribalism — Yes, among people with your own racial background, assuming one is not of mixed heritage, taller may mean smarter. But how can you tell anything about a person from the other side of the world? That Chinese guy may be shorter than you, and have a small nose in comparison, and be smarter too. Or maybe I’m just smarting about the small nose thing.

  10. Among many other insights, Dutton notes that taller men are generally smarter than shorter men, because women have sexually selected both for intelligence and height. Intelligence gives men status and resources while height typically makes them better at winning fights and protecting the woman.

    This is repeating the myth of “female eugenics”, which does not in any way, shape or form exist. If it did, we would see a lot less children out of wedlock; less idiots and criminals in general, a higher mean IQ and so on. And, finally, you would not read this post because I would not exist if female eugenics was true: because I’m a failure and a retard. The truth is that most women are as stupid regarding the choice of their mate as men are.

    Folks, if you’re fat, dumb, slow-witted, were bad in school, short-tempered etc., just don’t have kids, who will turn out like yourself, and suffer their whole life. If I had not found to Christ last year, I would have simply killed myself. (Of course you could make the argument that the worse your life is, the more you’re looking for a higher meaning, and finally making your way to the way, the truth and the life: Christ Jesus — which is the most important part of this life, be sure. But I know numerous others who haven’t: just check out inmendham on YouTube, for example.)

    In short: Refrain from sexual intercourse if stupid or anything else of the above, please — just like I do.

    • Replies: @Joe862
    , @Seamus Padraig
    , @j2
  11. Addendum: I’d also not that I’d rather have Downs Syndrome than be aware of my averageness, my mediocrity. (On the other hand, you can make the case that many geniuses have suffered enormously too, like Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Goethe, Leopardi etc. Especially the great Dane, Kierkegaard, knew that he was the smartest chap alive at that time in Denmark (though all of the Kierkegaards were highly gifted: his brother [who went insane in old age], his father [who was a simple peasant but read immensely and widely), and the son of his brother, who went insane too), and suffered terribly. The question boils down to: should one, then, have children? Sören answered in the negative: he refrained from marrying his rather pretty fiancé Regine Olsen. [This reminds of an essay Christopher Langan wrote (part of The Portable Langan) who argues that while he prefers some kind of eugenic measures (calling himself an anti-dysgenicist), one needs to take care not to remove characteristics from the gene pool that in normal people lead to mental illness, but are an important part of the genius (Dutton wrote a book on it with Charlton: The Genius Famine, which is on blogspot)]).

  12. Anonymous [AKA "hwy"] says: • Website
    @Red Pill Angel

    Those that are bald on the head front are thinkers
    Those that are bald on the back are good lovers
    Those who are bald both on the front & back are those who think that they are good lovers.

  13. anon[259] • Disclaimer says:

    “Women with large buttocks were found to be introverted, self-abasing, and high in guilt. ”
    The Kardashians, J-Lo, Beyoncé, Demi Lovato?

    • Replies: @Red Pill Angel
    , @renfro
    , @Wally
  14. @anon

    Right, these ladies give the lie to shy, self-effacing women with big behinds. Dutton, whether he realizes it or not, is measuring body image and self esteem here. Steatopygic ladies who date black men get a lot of positive attention.

  15. ogunsiron says:

    The link between external color and mental processes makes some kind of sense in light of the following, from :

    From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core

    Ectoderm is one of the three primary germ layers in the very early embryo. The other two layers are the mesoderm (middle layer) and endoderm (most proximal layer), with the ectoderm as the most exterior (or distal) layer.[1] It emerges and originates from the outer layer of germ cells. The word ectoderm comes from the Greek ektos meaning “outside”, and derma, meaning “skin.”[2]

  16. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Well… typecasting is big in movies.

    There are some who are chosen for heroic looks or nobility. Others are chosen to play villains.

  17. @Red Pill Angel

    Good Lord what a useless and nonsensical comment.

    • Replies: @Red Pill Angel
  18. Anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @Red Pill Angel

    He’s had scalp reduction surgery, a hair transplant, and takes Propecia. Without those interventions, he’d probably be bald.

  19. Joe862 says:
    @My genes are my thorn in the flesh

    I’m pretty sure the height thing is because height and intelligence are related to nutrition.

    • Replies: @expat47
  20. anonymous[148] • Disclaimer says:

    Based on this brilliant -cough- scientific -cough- study, we can infer that the Devil looks like a White degenerate, or vice versa.

    With that in mind…

    Now the sustained evil (over centuries and millennia) of the white degenerate is beginning to make sense.

    Now the whole “in-his-image” thing is beginning to make sense. You guys just got the based-on-who figure wrong.

  21. The one and only way to judge people morally is by what they do.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    , @Meimou
  22. Aren’t the sample sizes so small and almost certainly so limited in ethnic representativeness that this is nearly worthless rubbish. Not that natural selection wouldn’t have tuned us up to read character in a person’s appearance, which, as with lying, is almost dangerously unreliable. Better not skip the (also unreliable) interview. And pay a marriage broker on results by instalments.

  23. @anonymous

    Is that you, Tiny Duck? Good morning!

  24. j2 says:
    @My genes are my thorn in the flesh

    There is something to female eugenics. The females I have spoken to all think that for a man to be handsome, he has to be tall. For a woman, a man should be taller than she is, but OK, they may marry shorter, especially if there are enough good reasons, but we talk about what is handsome. Then women do prefer that the man is a bit more intelligent than they are. It might be so that women overestimate their intelligence and want to have as intelligent man, who then is superior, but I think this is not the case. Women have a division of what are men’s jobs and what are women’s jobs and the man should be more intelligent to solve all hard problems in this world that is made for men. That means, good life for the family requires an intelligent man, a woman cannot do it. Especially intelligent women suffer from this bias as it can be hard to find still more intelligent men. So, there is this bias, in average. It does not count for the highly intelligent as they suffer too much of being excluded in the childhood and never recover and may decide not to have any children, but this is a so small group that it does not matter. This Dulles also claimed that Finns are more intelligent than other whites. I disagree, though of course there must be very intelligent Finns and the Pisa results are good but I think Finns are just the same as all Europeans.

  25. “DUNCAN
    There’s no art
    To find the mind’s construction in the face.
    He was a gentleman on whom I built
    An absolute trust. (1.4.13-16)”

    Duncan in Macbeth commenting on the Thane of Cawdor turning out to be a traitor.
    Also few Nazi leaders conformed to their own racial prejudices in their own appearance.

  26. Mishra says:

    Consider that he’s already been chased almost to the ends of the earth…

    adjunct professor of anthropology at Oulu University in northern Finland.

    • Replies: @Gordo
    , @Cato
  27. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian

    If my nose were longer I might make better comments.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  28. @jilles dykstra

    The author is referring to making assumptions about what a person might do based on appearance. That isn’t a moral judgement. This applies pretty well to politicians, most of whom are physically unattractive. There’s a well known saying about it: “Politics is showbiz for ugly people”.

    Many of the particularly repellent public figures in government are ugly looking. I usually predict how bad a politician or bureaucrat is going to be by whether or not they look like assholes. All of Obama’s picks for appointed office looked like assholes, as did all of GW Bush’s picks and almost all of Trump’s current picks. Quite a few of them are also butt-ugly.

    Almost all of our current senators either look like assholes or are butt-ugly. The same holds true for House members, though only a few of them are well known by appearances on TV news outlets. Try this: the next time you read a quote by a politician that strikes you as offensive, and you don’t know what the person looks like, search out a photo of him and see if he looks like an asshole or is just plain butt-ugly.

    Take Mike Pence as an example. The first time I saw a picture of him, I thought, ” What a butt-ugly scutter. He looks like an asshole”, and he has turned out to be an asshole, and he is butt-ugly to boot. Dick Cheney, John Bolton, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, James Comey, James Clapper, Robert Mueller, all of these people are butt-ugly assholes and they look like butt-ugly assholes.

    That’s why I regard physiognomy as a valid art, just as Dr. Dutton does.

  29. Gordo says:

    Finland sounds better every day.

  30. @Red Pill Angel

    “If my nose were longer I might make better comments.”

    Maybe not. My schnozz is so big that I could smoke a cigarette in the rain with my hands behind my back, and look at the shit I write.

    • LOL: jacques sheete
  31. It’s just silly to suggest that people don’t judge one another on sight constantly. It’s a survival technique.

    I judge the background, educational level, aggressiveness, motives and even their immediate state of mind in the first two seconds I see them. To do otherwise is to invite harm to one’s self or family.

    • Agree: Simon in London
  32. Ohhhh goodness me oh my, as if choosing a tall man is an indication of intelligence or character.

    Sure there are some things one might be able to guess at buy looking at another person — and then have those guesses supported over time. But there are also a huge number of guesses that are simply wrong, that we discard because they are wrong. But if one only adhere’s to the conclusions that they consider correct, you simply miss the larger picture.

    Women choose tall men because it is generally understood that they will be sustainable providers and provide a good gene pool. But whether such men are intelligent of good character is completely a another matter. If it gene pool then most likely good provider is good to have more opportunities to prove to a larger pool of women who will be making themselves available despite tall so and so already being mated. High IQ and wisdom of faithfulness is just not something one can make intelligent guesses about based on appearance. I expect people who walk out of Harvard to be rational people on sight. But before long I may discover they have completely skewed something as simple as proportional analysis. Appearance and intelligence or morality – character appearance is a dicey proposition.

    Now let’s take a tiny poke at this ethnicity play. If I make association s based on ethnicity, I am not making guesses based on looks. I am basing a guess or a conclusion based on what belief system one comes from and the relative behaviors – or practices of as to culture. Since all tall men are not any one ethnicity.

    Sure one can judge a book by its cover, sure one can some things about a another by looking. But whether one can know in depth merely by looking is the domain of spiritualists and soothsayers.

    It is entirely possible for 100 million french men to be wrong as wrong as 1 million women have misjudged the character, and intelligence of the tall man they selected as mates.

    I don’t get tattoos or why people in this modern age get them. There are very rare tattoo that make any sense to me, I generally view anyone with a tattoo as a potential criminal — matters not their skin color or dress — anyone sporting a tattoo sends my security antennae up. I guess by this article my conclusion that a classroom full of tattoo wearing students are gang banger or association with some other criminal association.

    The volume of data that human brain calculates and analyzes to make conclusions about others is just too much to dissect into parcels and relations at our current stage of human testing on this issue.

    As for height Tall men are rare — I guess that makes the rest of us – most rather low on the totem of IQ desirability — nonsense.

  33. @Twodees Partain

    Well the one positive aspect, for men, of being “butt-ugly” as you so poetically phrase, is the strange enigma of ugly men who attract beautiful women, and starting with myself : I have always considered myself to indeed be a “butt-ugly” guy and have however never lacked for relationships with “beautiful” gals, having been persued, seduced and chased by gorgeous ladies for the course of my adult lifetime.
    I can recall a lady-friend (attorney) stunning me with the statement that : “You are an ugly guy,but in a beautiful way”.
    Can recall a lovely (black) girl proclaiming : “You are and interesting guy whereas most men are quite boring”.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army Vet, and pro Jazz artist.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Alden
  34. Interesting stuff but I’m not convinced. I get it, but I think it would serve us better to judge idiots from non idiots. We do this by paying attention to the amount of self inflicted wounds they carry out in their life.

    Self inflicted wounds can be tattoos, piercings, drug and alcohol abuse, smoking all the time, habitual lying, refusing to work, destroying credit, burning through money, being promiscuous, are rabid democrats etc…. Add to the list.

    Short, tall, left or right handed isn’t the kind of differences I find worth noting. Paying attention to the above is a better investment of attention when seeking out safe people to deal with.

  35. anonymous[418] • Disclaimer says:

    Hairy, muscular, long-limbed, bald men, with wide faces and narrow eyes are more aggressive and have lower impulse control. President Trump typifies this.

    Trump is not bald, nor does he appear to be particularly hairy, other than his head, or muscular.

    taller men are generally smarter

    Where? The smartest men in history don’t appear to have been a tall group but rather just the opposite, to have been on the shorter side.
    One could get approximately as accurate results through horoscope reading although I will say that there is something to appearance correlating to personal characteristics. Take a look at the mugshots of convicted criminals and notice what a scroungy looking bunch they are. This’ll make for some lengthy bar conversations though.

    • Agree: Red Pill Angel
  36. Anonymous[204] • Disclaimer says:

    This is very promising.

    So with good monitoring, we should be able to find people with regressive techniques and apply early intervention to help them understand issues that they are mentally constrained(or blocked) from comprehending due to their smaller anterior cingulate gyrus(this is a well known issue with the mentally inflexible/regressive, and also associated with their lower IQ).

  37. An article this insightful belongs on Return of Kings

  38. KA says:

    “Dutton, ever the evolutionist, opines that this is because we have been selected to be religious over thousands of years of evolution. Hence, those who are atheists reflect mutant genes in the brain and people with mental mutations are more likely to have physical ones. This explains their asymmetrical features and asymmetrical brains, leading to left-handedness.”

    How have we been selected to be religious by evolution ? Christians , Hindus,Muslims killing each other ?
    What are those genes that serve God’s understanding or understanding of God?

    There are many thing wrongs with the excerpts and reviews and conclusion from the fraudulent materials presented by the book.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  39. Anon[248] • Disclaimer says:
    @Twodees Partain

    People will take your comment seriously. If I could, I would slap your ugly face for sh`tting up the comment section with this.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  40. Anon[248] • Disclaimer says:

    “a lovely (black) girl”
    No one cares about your cucky virtue-signalling here. And your humble bragging betrays your low sexual market value. Sometimes it’s better to not say anything.

    • Replies: @WhiteWolf
  41. “Hairy, muscular, long-limbed, bald men”
    so basically Non-East Asians.
    By the way I found it interesting that already in the Ramayana Rama is described as having “long arms” which obvious is meant as a positive trait. Up to the time I read the book I never thought about the difference between (relatively) long and short arms.

    • Replies: @Alden
  42. so, what was the conclusion in the book? no, I am not about to read this kind of book.

    after reading about faces in a research(around 2003) on averaging faces in a computer program. the more faces the researchers feed into the program, the resulting face becomes more and more attractive.

    beauty is symmetry. nothing more or less.

    how is something like this consider serious research? not in the same category as voodoo? witchcraft?

  43. AaronB says:

    It’s always amusing to me how philosophy and popular culture hasn’t caught up to Darwinism.

    One of the key insights of Darwinism is that our minds have not evolved to know truth but only survive. If we evolved to be religious, this implies there is a higher standpoint from which we can judge whether it’s true. But our minds have not evolved to give us truth, so we could never judge whether religion is true. Any answer obtained through our cognitive processes would necessarily be the product of evolutionary processes not designed to give us truth.

    All our knowledge are ‘useful fictions’, according to Darwinism. If that belief helps you design a functioning airplane, great. If that religious belief helps you cope with psychological realities, great. Epistomelogically there is no difference between the two.

    I find it amusing when ‘scientists’ use Darwin and ‘truth’ in the same sentence.

    As for this book, if we evolved to naturally read people, we certainly don’t need it! As with all such ‘science’, it’s conclusions are probably mostly bullshit or so many counterexample in real life that go against the ‘statistical trends’ as to be useless.

    Rely on intuition.

  44. Jake says:

    Can we know by looks which white Gentiles are most likely to be the most culturally suicidal liberals?

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  45. Joe Wong says:

    What the author or the western main stream means is killing one is murder but killing in industrial scale is humanitarian intervention for demicracy and human rights even if it is bombing, killing and waterboarding on the fabricated phantom WMD allegation.

    • Replies: @Alden
  46. L Woods says:
    @Red Pill Angel

    How come I have a 3 SD iq

    Lmao, no you don’t.

    • Replies: @Red Pill Angel
  47. Alden says:

    And you’re extremely modest as well.

    • Replies: @Authenticjazzman
    , @vladdy
  48. Alden says:
    @Joe Wong

    Yes,yes, we know. Only White Europeans, never the Chinese or any other race has ever had a war.

    Chinese history, 6,000 years of peace and harmony when all disputes were settled by negotiations and never, never any kind of violence.

    BTW, the Taiping rebellion never happened. It’s just a myth created by the evil French and British. And Mao created heaven on earth without a single death.

    The 3 Kingdoms war never happened. The Chinese just made up the stories as a way to entertain themselves on long winter evenings.

  49. Alden says:
    @Erik Sieven

    Long arms are useful for baseball players, boxers, bull fighters restaurant cooks and police officers.

    Probably pickpockets and shoplifters as well.

  50. Alden says:

    Tattoos are a generational thing. When you were young older people were appalled when young women got their ears pierced instead of wearing those horrible clip on earrings.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  51. Alden says:
    @Twodees Partain

    Both John Bolton and Eric Holder are very very good looking. Bolton’s getting old and wrinkly but he was very habndsomr when younger.
    Both have well proportioned features and biggish eyes.

    Senator Feinstein is old now but was a drop dead beauty back in the day. She never photographed well I know. She had white white skin shiny black hair grayish hazel eyes and perfect features.
    In fact she closely resembles the Friends actress Courtney Cox.

    California lieutenant governor Newsome and Los Angeles Mayor Garcetti are very handsome. Ca Senator Tunney was better looking than Brad Pitt. San Francisco Mayor Moscone was very handsome.

    President Kennedy was supposed to be very good looking according to the paid off media but he was mediocre looking.

    • Replies: @renfro
  52. AndrewR says:

    I don’t necessarily associate tats with criminality, but I do associate them with poor judgment and poor taste.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  53. AndrewR says:

    Tats are certainly more common now than they have ever been, but while that may mean that they’re less correlative with criminality, they correlate more highly with poor judgement. In the past, many people with poor judgement never got tats. Nowadays that is much less true.

  54. renfro says:

    I do not get the deal about big butts being popular or the ideal for women….huge turn off to me.

    They look absolutely deformed. ..mystery to me how they are able get around or even get up from a sitting position with those mountains of blubber on their back sides.

  55. @L Woods

    President Trump actually does have a hairy chest! And he takes Propecia for baldness. Ok.

    Only joking about my IQ, Mr L Woods. Just one of those dreadful midwit persons struggling to comment on the internet, without enough brains to get by. If only my poor nose —

    Seriously, though, I’m just not buying Dutton’s theory except in the broadest terms.

  56. Anonymous[342] • Disclaimer says:

    You are just afraid now that with improved technologies, plus other cloud assisted gathering for big data, we can now identify primitives such as yourself and implement remediation for your limited brains before you can cause too much trouble. You have to understand though that your illness is treatable and you don’t really have worry about being thought ill of it: like most stigmas, knowing how common it is will dispel it and the cost of treatment will drop with scalability.

    • Replies: @bjondo
  57. renfro says:

    You have weird taste in looks.


    • Replies: @Alden
  58. @EliteCommInc.

    A) Height is a decent measure of strength and health for sexual signaling in the same way that male crows are larger than their females and especially have longer tail feathers which impede flight. The ability to costly signal indicates that the specimen is of superior quality, and therefore likely to pass on similar genes to his children.

    B) Intelligence is complex but one of the strongest tells of flawed intelligence will be ill health and potentially associated brain damage. Height is also indeed associated with higher intelligence, all other things being equal(though only mildly).

    C) Fidelity is not necessarily that much of a marker of provision. Sarah Blaffer Hardy found that in tribal societies, women in monogamous pairings did not have higher childhood survival rates versus the women in polygamous relationships with a high status male such as the chieftan.

    D) We are talking about heuristics here, therefore generalities apply and it is not necessary to seek for details from a “soothsayers.” Valid objections can be made in regards to the sample size and publication bias, objections about “lots of people could be wrong” are useless and do not advance knowledge.

  59. @AndrewR

    LOL. I understand. But our observations are not in and of themselves accurate. Some very moral and intelligent, well groomed particularly hygienic people have tattoos.

    I love picking on Miss Coulter: tall, deeply analytical sarcastic, funny and yet she has a tattoo. According to a comment I read she showers twice a day. And despite her issues with multiple voting — i don’t generally associate her with the criminal elements or intent.

    Why she hasn’t found a husband or willing to sacrifice what it takes to actually be married may b e criminal — but it’s not against the law.

    I just think this theory is generally applicable with a ton of caveats — like judge a book by its cover. I was right next to Miss Coulter once and I opted not to ask her to lunch – it was lunchtime. My assumption is that she would have lunch with someone like me – based solely on her appearance. Maybe I was right, but then never having opened the cover to test it — I will never know.

    Suppose I triple check all of the pares of those students with tattoos because tattoos make them suspect and found that three of the twenty were in fact cutting corners. It would be highly suspect if I counted those three as representative of the whole. Three out of twenty confirming said conclusion minus evidence about the other 17, is questionable analytics.

    I am single because I am poor, not just because I am short and unattractive. I am single because in discussion, I am wholly void of the nuances of empathy and sympathy pressing to analytical aspects of conversation – on appearance, one would never know that. As human beings it takes a long time for most of us to come to accommodation about who we are and even then, we surprise ourselves. Banking a set of solid unmalleable conclusions on people based on how they look seems a dicey move.

    I do enjoy the disappointment when women discover that celibacy is not just a line —


    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
  60. hyperbola says:

    The zionist racist-supremacists and their attempts to justify crimes by “supermen” and the role of the “chosen people” get more and more boring. Look at the claims of the “source”,

    Dutton says in his book, the relevant research has been published in top psychology journals, such as Intelligence, Personality and Individual Differences and Evolutionary Psychological Science

    and then keep in mind who are the publishers of this four year old “scientific journal”. Sad to see that Nature is now a propaganda organ for the “chosen people”.

    The Israel Lobby in Germany scribd

    The ProSieben / Sat1 Group, which combines the German TV station ProSieben, Sat.1, Kabel eins, N24, 9Live and which are especially designed for women transmitter Sixx under one roof, is in possession of the Jew Haim Saban. The Axel Springer Foundation, which was part of the Axel Springer AG conducted from 1981 to 2010 by the Jew Ernst Cramer. After Cramer’s death Friede Springer himself took over as CEO. Friede Springer is a Zionist and got 2000 even the Leo Baeck Prize, the highest award of the Central Council of Jews in Germany. CEO of Axel Springer AG is the Zionist Dopfner Matthias, who has held a position at the Aspen Institute Berlin at the same time. The Aspen Institute is an American lobby, which was founded after WW2 propaganda purposes. The Institute is managed by Trustees, the President and CEO is the Jew Walter Isaacson.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Anonymous
  61. JamesG says: • Website

    Underestimated by everyone (except me) is the influence language on your face.

    People who speak English exercise a difference set of facial muscles than those who speak other languages.

    Doubt that?

    Just recall the words of Professor Higgins.

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  62. Alden says:

    You are looking at photographs. Expect for Holder and Bolton I wrote about people I saw in person fairly often.

    Lived right down the street from Feinstein when she was still married to dr Feinstein and young and beautiful.

    I saw Mayor Moscone several mornings a week because we parked in the same parking lot. Knew Newsone when he was in high school.

    Photos are one thing. The actual people are another. You’ve never seen any of those people in person so don’t judge them by their photos.

    • Replies: @Truth
  63. Alden says:

    So Haim Saban is all over the world.

  64. @JamesG

    Totally true.

    The French have kissable lips not because they kiss a lot, but because of the way they speak.

    Ever wondered why so many Americans have such formless, boring faces after they reach a certain age?

    It’s caused by how all too many of us speak.

    And why the Germans of old so often looked like angry hawks. Now they are mostly fat merkleized chickens. Doomed by their disgracefully sloppy articulation.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  65. @Red Pill Angel

    Red Pill Angel: If you are concerned about Dutton’s book and its thesis on the grounds of encouraging tribalism, perhaps you should read the Talmud which will help you better understand the Torah: Both texts being the two most important “books” ever written by humans, well …the “chosen”, on “tribalism”.

  66. Ju Ahn says:

    This is an interesting article that you’d most likely never come across in mainstream media. Human beings obviously have natural defensive mechanisms against this ingrained in our genes through ages of evolution. I’ve read an article about a study in the past when dealing with broader-faced person, people adjust their behavior to become more selfish themselves to account for the selfish tendencies exhibited by broader faced individuals.

  67. By-tor [AKA "Jesse James"] says:

    As if there is no evil in backwards Africa, Afro-centric Wakanda nor Wauconda, Illinois ( Which was culturally appropriated for its name for that absurd fictional Afro-tech country that will never exist nor ever could exist even in the modern-day definition of a Second World country ). You can stop culturally appropriating the white-designed internet, the white-designed computer and the white-designed English language for your own benefit.

  68. Ju Ahn says:

    I don’t get it. According to the article, white people tend to have narrower skull and fairer complexions. Both characteristics signify gentler temperament. They tend to have more hairs, muscular, longer limbs than Asians. However, Africans have muscular and longer limbs than whites. Can you articulate how white people look more devilish than people of other race from these profiles? I’m obviously not a white person myself, but from the point of relatively impartial bystander, your argument doesn’t make sense.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  69. Ju Ahn says:

    Another interesting point from the book is that observers could gauge male intelligence from inspecting face of the individual but not for females. Has this finding accounted for the makeups women put on the face? One can also suspect female intelligence wasn’t important factor for mate selection through stages of evolution, so we simply evolved in a way that we cannot tell women’s intelligence from their appearance.

  70. ricpic says:

    What about cock size?

    • Replies: @Ju Ahn
    , @FKA Max
  71. @Χωρίς Ὄνομα

    No, I’m not “concerned” about tribalism; tribalism is a normal human condition, and I meant my comment to convey that. Perhaps I failed so here goes again. We can only infer character with accuracy among people who resemble ourselves a good bit, unless we have a very wide experience with a lot of different types of people. One cannot reliably compare Scandinavians and Italians, much less Han Chinese and Watusi tribesmen. So really the book is a validation of our innate trabalism. It does sound like a good read.

  72. @Χωρίς Ὄνομα

    So Dutton is correct that appearances signal character, and yes, we probably evolved to read faces to a degree, but the farther away the other person is genetically, the harder to read. This difficulty is probably behind our distrust of strangers, and might be responsible for European women’s current troubles with foreigners. A tall, dark Somali guy is not the same as a tall, dark Italian, who is not the same as a Dane of average height for his nationality with brown eyes and hair.

  73. Anonymous [AKA "Willy Ruffian"] says:

    Well, that’s pretty convoluted, even for a paranoid schizophrenic. I commend you sir.

  74. Ju Ahn says:

    Probably positively correlated with aggression since larger size would signify higher testosterone levels.

  75. Corvinus says:

    Dutton acknowledges in his book that the studies referenced deal with human perception — whether we react differently because of what we see, even if that perception is inaccurate. And he also notes the relationships for example between facial shapes and criminal behavior are probabilities, not certainties. So Dutton took into account such limitations while cautioning that correlation does not equal correlation. In order words, there is a subjectivity of evaluating a physionomic style.

    So while on the surface that it is true that we can judge people by what they look like, how accurate are those judgements, and the manner by which we came up with those judgements, remains decidedly up for debate. Thus, one must be wary of “hard science” based on hereditarian hypotheses that are conjectures about traits which have multiple causes.

    • Replies: @Ju Ahn
  76. Truth says:

    Lived right down the street from Feinstein when she was still married to dr Feinstein and young and beautiful.

    Mr. Feinstein was never beautiful, not even by transexual standards.

  77. Long arms … yes, they are nice to have if you need to swing from tree to tree. Our simian cousins all have extremely long arms – the apes, monkeys, orangutans, other guys with tails.

    My worst suspicions now stand validated by science: The apes and monkey, thanks to their long arms, are more intelligent than homo sapiens. And, BTW, they also have broader faces than ours.

  78. Corvinus says:

    “We would have been better off allowing true “freedom of association” to exist rather than imposing government enforced “public accommodation” on businesses and individuals.”

    That is patently false. There is no such thing as “true freedom of association”. You live in a society where citizens properly demand that government redress their grievances. In the case of the South, the states there observably violated due process for blacks AND whites.

    “In pre-civil-rights (for some) days, blacks were progressing just fine on their own “content of their character” and would have helped end much segregation on their own by their own actions.”

    Once again, you are outright lying. Plessy called for separate but equal. But the Southrons could not even follow this simple directive, as they made things decidedly separate and unequal. Fortunately, they got their comeuppance by a combination of northerners and southerners.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  79. Ju Ahn says:

    Yes, but I think many intelligent people can discern that these findings of social science are just averages. The problem with the climate in the US is that they do not treat people as intelligent beings who can judge the merits of these findings as their own but block the discussions of these topics altogether. Labeling whoever bold or foolish enough to raise voice in these matters as racists and ostracize them from academic communities or workplaces.

  80. FKA Max says: • Website

    Some older comments on the topic that might interest you:

    The biggest penises are found in populations between the Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn. According to Allen’s Rule, which specifies that protruding body parts tend to be larger in populations inhabiting warmer climes (they serve as useful heat radiators, like the huge ears of desert rabbits)
    I could be wrong, but this makes more sense to me than just the testosterone theory, even if androgen receptor sensitivity (lowest in Asians, highest in Africans), etc. is taken into account.

    This would also explain why northern Europeans despite their larger body size and taller stature (Bergmann’s Rule) don’t have the longest penises, because size/length is decreased due to Allen’s Rule?

    Am I normal? A systematic review and construction of nomograms for flaccid and erect penis length and circumference in up to 15 521 men

    Consistent and strongest significant correlation was between flaccid stretched or erect length and height, which ranged from r = 0.2 to 0.6.

    Africans were taller when the colonial era ended in the 1960s. They may have lost height because of collapsing health care systems, rising population density and less dietary diversity among urbanites, the authors said.
    Since penile size and height are somewhat correlated (see above comment), this increase in height for South Koreans and other East Asians due to better nutrition, etc. should also then logically translate into a larger average penis size, and potentially a shorter average penis size in sub-Saharan Africans compared to the colonial era.


  81. @EliteCommInc.

    damn, for a guy who uses lol, your comment is surprisingly, supremely eloquent 🙂

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  82. @Jake

    Jake, just go with my scientific method: if they look like assholes, they’re probably liberal WASP or Jew. It is an unfailing scientific method for which I regrettably have no proof.

  83. anarchyst says:

    You are wrong Corvinus. Your communist nature is showing. The right to choose who one associates with is a basic HUMAN right that was abolished with the passage of the so-called “civil-rights” acts, BUT ONLY FOR WHITES. You see, according to the so-called “U S Department of Justice” (actually “just us”, only whites can be “racist” as “people of color do not have political or social power–(their words exactly).
    As to segregation, whites and blacks lost a lot when desegregation was forced on us at the point of bayonets. Blacks WERE coming along just fine, BEFORE the imposition of “civil-rights” laws.
    I was there during the so-called “civil-rights” demonstrations of the 1960s and observed much criminal behavior that never got reported. You see, then as is now, the news media, communists and their fellow travelers had an agenda of their own and as such, could not “let a crisis go to waste”. The rapes, robberies, and the general trashing of the areas they occupied were never reported. Only the reactions of the local citizenry and law enforcement to the lawless behavior of the “demonstrators” was reported…
    These demonstrations were not peaceful by any means, the demonstrators being “egged on” by their new york-based jewish “carpetbagger” handlers. The locals, both black and white, wanted NOTHING to do with these “outsiders” coming into their peaceful communities, only to cause trouble.
    I WAS THERE, and personally witnesses the criminal activity by these so-called “civil-rights (for some)” pioneers…
    We are living with the results to this very day…

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    , @dearieme
  84. Mefobills says:
    @Ju Ahn

    The races have to be divided, and only then inter-group physiognomy applied.

    A big-assed black women is normal physiognomy for some tribes, as they stored fat in their buttocks and thighs. This created a lower center of gravity, with the penalty of not being able to swing legs as easily when walking. Black men of those tribes associate big asses with genetic fitness.

    North Eastern Black Tribes are evolved for longer distance running, and some -like the Somalians have weird bulb shaped heads.

    So, physiognomy has to be MORE granular, and divided down into race, and even further into tribe.

    White people can easily tell if another white is “off.” A good example is Alfred E. Neuman on Mad Magazine. Or, the Dennis the Menace look. Some dissing of “gingers” is legitimate as there is distinct behavioral differences associated with red hair.

    Within the Han Chinese race, there are some high IQ men who look like Frogs. They are extremely ugly, yet also possess great intelligence. The normal evolutionary pattern was bypassed with Mandarin system of civil exams. Those who passed the exams, made enough money to pass on their genes. This process bypassed “good looks” as a proxy for genetic fitness and intelligence.

    • Agree: Red Pill Angel
    • Replies: @Ju Ahn
  85. Buddy Ray says:

    So I’m “self blaming.” What does that even mean?

  86. Cato says:

    Yes. Not only a mere adjunct, but a mere adjunct in a very undesirable place. Political incorrectness does not advance a career in academic anthropology.

  87. WhiteWolf says:

    He’s mensa, army vet and a pro jazz player and feels the need to tell us about it. That shows low self esteem more than anything. At least he’s considered not boring by African women.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  88. @Astuteobservor II

    That’s scary.

    LOL or laughing for the more sophisticated.

    Very kind of you

  89. Kingfelix says:

    Little late for an April Fool’s.

  90. Cato says:

    Homophily. I imagine all of us have that as a feature of our lives: we mostly hang with people just like ourselves. For example: almost everyone I socialize with has “doctor” in front of their name. How strange, since only about 2% of US adults have a doctorate.

  91. Kingfelix says:
    @Twodees Partain

    Nice theory, somewhat undermined by how butt-ugly just about all Americans are.

  92. Kingfelix says:

    The most easily available evidence of a man being a good provider, rather than his height, is his having a satisfied mate. It’s easily shown by experience that having a smiling, attractive, satisfied female partner is a sure way to attract sexual interest from females. This is why poor providers don’t, generally, have mistresses, whereas mistress is a well-defined role in many cultures.

  93. @KA

    As I have already said, the sample sizes suggest little confidence should be accorded the reported research results as such, though evolution presumably wired us to prefer some faces and bodies to others, not least for producing viable offspring. However it seems you are missing knowledge of a commonplace of evolutionary psychology, even if, like many such now clichéd observations, they could be called “Just So Stories”. Do you not think there must be built in behavioural tendencies in the tribes, then larger ethnic groups, that have survived to propagate their genes, to share common emotions based on beliefs which have no basis in modern scientific standards of evidence and reasoning about them? If so, given that our brains, including the controls for behaviour as well as IQ type cognition, are a product of natural selection for the relevant alleles and haplotypes – plus a bit of genetic drift and some bottlenecks, do you really have a problem believing that most of us have a fair amount of natural religiosity built into our genomes?

    Looking introspectively I have to wonder why I was blessed or cursed from an early age with being able to face total uncertainty as a non theist until I sort of got something to believe in when Hawking and others explained that everything we know of (and of course a zillion other universes) could start from “nothing”.

  94. Ju Ahn says:

    I’m aware of the point the book is making. I was simply playing along with some of the unjustified comments made about white people.

    “Within the Han Chinese race, there are some high IQ men who look like Frogs. They are extremely ugly, yet also possess great intelligence. The normal evolutionary pattern was bypassed with Mandarin system of civil exams. Those who passed the exams, made enough money to pass on their genes. This process bypassed “good looks” as a proxy for genetic fitness and intelligence.”

    I’m guessing you’re trying to say Asian people are ugly? I suppose I should be offended, but I’m not Chinese.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  95. @Alden

    At least one person here sees the truth.


  96. @Kingfelix

    I was hoping that nobody would notice that weakness. You have put a big dent in my theory’s validity right there. I hope you are satisfied.

  97. Corvinus says:

    “You are wrong Corvinus. Your communist nature is showing.”

    It is not communist for citizens to request that their government guarantee their basic freedoms.

    “The right to choose who one associates with is a basic HUMAN right that was abolished with the passage of the so-called “civil-rights” acts, BUT ONLY FOR WHITES.”

    You have every liberty to choose who you associate with. The problem is that the southron community had dictated to individual white southerners that it was illegal to marry or sell their homes to black southerners.

    “Blacks WERE coming along just fine, BEFORE the imposition of “civil-rights” laws.”

    Another outright lie on your part. It was proven time and time again that funding and facilities was other than equal for southern blacks. Southrons are notorious lawbreakers.

    “I was there during the so-called “civil-rights” demonstrations of the 1960s and observed much criminal behavior that never got reported.”

    No. The daily marches in the South were covered extensively, and showed both the violent acts of police and demonstrators. What you are doing here is covering up for your southron friends.

    “These demonstrations were not peaceful by any means, the demonstrators being “egged on” by their new york-based jewish “carpetbagger” handlers.”

    That would be Fake News.

    “The locals, both black and white, wanted NOTHING to do with these “outsiders” coming into their peaceful communities, only to cause trouble.”

    Actually, there were a number of white southerners who wanted Jim Crow to be abolished, so they welcomed the influx of demonstrators from all parts.

  98. Anonymous[422] • Disclaimer says:

    People with squarer forehead shape…. when looked from the front, are more logical minded.

    People with different sized/shaped top row and bottom row of teeth have more unbalanced personalities. Same with people whose head slants towards one side or the other.

    People with sharper canine teeth along with the people who have a protruding mouth when looked from the side, are also more aggressive but cannot handle others aggression as good.

    The length of the nose of a person determines how much careful a person is regarding smaller amounts of money too not just big amounts. The longer the nose the more value they give to it too. They are also the least likely to be lazy.

    Regarding bodily hairiness, i remember reading that high IQ people were found in a 5:1 ratio among more hirsute men as compared to 9:1 among less hirsute men. I think this was a within a race finding.

    People with square jaws or jaws that jut out of the side of the face have a higher tendency to get turned on when people try to change them in a non-threatening way, if they see it as useful for their personal benefit.

    They are also more open to good suggestions from other people if they see those as useful to them or their career/business etc. Round faced people seem the opposite regarding this particular point.

    People with a sharper nose tip are more irritable and aggressive but are also weaker in personality. They are very stronger in offence but weaker in defense. Similar to people with sharper canine teeth i suppose. They also seem to be more easily influenced.

    People with eyes large relative to their face have a greater tendency to take things more personally. Or take more things personally. People with lips larger relative to their face have a greater tendency to react more emotionally.

    People with a depression or a hole? on their chin are more persistent. People with similar on their cheeks….they get this when they are laughing or smiling ….are more cheerful. People with a butt-looking chin… people like me XD…. i dont know. I guess we are more interested in abstract stuff than other people are. As this kind of interest led me to make all this observations.

    People with a downward turned mouth when on a neutral face/mouth expression i mean sides of the mouth downward, are usually more pessimistic. People with an upward turned mouth are the opposite.

    People with round faces have a faster all round intelligence.

    People with deep-seated eyes are slow thinkers but think things more deeply. No pun intended. Same with people with long necks. They think about fewer things but think more deeply about them. People with protruding eyes are mentally quicker and have a wider range of thoughts. But are not as deep a thinkers. People with eyes that are neither too deep or protruding are intermediate between these two groups.

    People with protruding cheekbones are more crafty . Or have a higher tendency to see everybody and everything they do as craftiness and become crafty themselves.

    People with longer limbs are more style conscious.

    People with teeth showing even in a semi closed mouth have a higher tendency to finger others.

    Men with smaller penises value sex lesser than men with longer penises.

    People with downward-and -forward facing jaws have the best leadership abilities.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    , @ricpic
  99. Che Guava says:

    … and in every post. I told him it is very boring and not worth repeating long ago, seriously, from the posts, it seems AJM found a special needs branch of MENSA,

    A mod. told him to cut it out over a year ago, no effect.

    The only similarly repetitive thing among commentors on this site is Wally, with the CODOH link on every post. In response to a comment from me, Wally did briefly control his compulsion. At least Wally’s compulsion is not just a chest-thumping boast.

    • Replies: @Wally
  100. Corvinus says:

    Great laundry list, but you’re going to have to provide links for each component as evidence that each physical attribute and their corresponding personality trait is “correct” or “matches up”. You have a lot of work to do.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  101. annamaria says:

    Refreshing the U.S. history: “A Conversation on Race,” by Paul Craig Roberts

  102. Wally says:

    Big ass ghetto chicks “introverted, self-abasing, and high in guilt”?


  103. Wally says:
    @Che Guava

    “The only similarly repetitive thing among commentors on this site is Wally, with the CODOH link on every post. ”

    Say what? Talk about off topic.

    Oh my, someone got a whipping.

    And there Che Guava goes again, advocating censorship.

    Interesting since the numerous & quite varied posts I make he cannot refute. That’s why his panties are in a twist. Now he whines for moderator intervention.

    This drives the irrational True Believers such as Che Guava crazy:

    Only Liars Want Censorship
    debate here:

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  104. Che Guava says:

    Could say much on this. Only three things now.

    Clearly, sociopaths and psychopaths have attractive exteriors as stock in trade.

    Two days ago, was receiving a beaming smile from a young boy with Down’s, in return for a cheerful face from me. Like a glimpse of the sun on a rainy day.

    The line from the ancient Devo song, Mongoloid

    Happier than you and me

    came to mind.

    Mongies have much shorter lives on average, but in my several encounters with them, they really are happier. Perhaps because most are not able to be conscious of their own mortality, a blessing for them.

    Final point, you can tell evil from somebody who never makes eye contact, or has, as Americans say (or used to say) ‘shifty eyes’.

    Of course, some damaged people also cannot stand eye contact.

    The difference is that the former type are able to do it when, and only when, it is involving some type of gain.

    Much more to say on this thread, but it is already overcrowded, so leaving it at that.

  105. Che Guava says:


    You are trying to be really irritating. However, I am an old hand at tolerating trolls, let alone your brand of misrepresentation, on the ‘net.

    i. Give me one example where I refuted anything of yours.

    ii. How am I ‘whining for moderator intervention’?

    Could continue, but no point, you are clearly a fantasist (no, not in terms of your overly repeated links, etc.) as a person, and, to avoid repetition, a cretin.

    • Replies: @Wally
  106. Wally says:
    @Che Guava

    You are quite incompetent and without substance.

    i. Indeed, that’s my point. You have not / cannot refute the information that I post.
    You simply dodge & whine.

    ii. Read your previous posts where you invoke the moderator, I’m not going to continuously spoon feed you.

    • Troll: Che Guava
  107. Boring Darwinism. Just another plank needed to justify the future genocide of the “dirty non-white people”, and keep that annoying Judeo-Christian God–that cheek-turning pussy–out of their way.

  108. Anonymous [AKA "Lance has small hands"] says:

    What a Dx king homo name

  109. Anonymous [AKA "Michael Gordon"] says:

    Any experienced salesman knows this. The faster you can figure out the type of person you are selling to the more success you will have. All people inevitably present themselves in a way that aligns with their fundamental tastes and values systems.

  110. dearieme says:

    There are no “human rights”. Man is a social animal: his rights stem from the society of which he is part. The expression “civil rights” is not a bad stab at acknowledging this fact.

  111. @AaronB

    Rely on intuition.

    Agree. Reliable intuition is invaluable and many people (particularly men) just don’t have it which leaves them at a disadvantage in social situations. The same with empathy, very useful and not only do people suck at it but they often don’t even know what it means. Sherlock Holmes, for example, had very strong empathy. But ask the average American to describe it and he’ll give you a description of compassion. Not the same thing at all.

    Judging people based on physical traits alone just isn’t very reliable and soon the “exceptions” to the “rule” begin to pile up. Which is why I don’t get why some folks are so passionate about it. Ditto linking IQ and race Why the excitement over these things?. Does it get them laid or increase their access to valuable resources? As a hobby it’s beyond boring and in practical terms it’s all but useless. Whatever gets you through the night I suppose.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  112. Anonymous[243] • Disclaimer says:

    These are based on my personal observation.

    I guess i should have written this along with the comment.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  113. Corvinus says:

    “These are based on my personal observation.”

    Which is in effect your opinion. Which, like any opinion, may be influenced by confirmation bias.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  114. Anonymous[213] • Disclaimer says:

    theoretically. But it doesnt mean it is always true in practice.

  115. Anonymous [AKA "Always Be Closing"] says:

    Based on my observations and readings (not going to dig out links), women select for intelligence in men only up to a certain point; say, up to one standard deviation above the median; as you go higher up the male IQ scale, the tide turns, as women begin to select against higher male intelligence. Very high IQ men, at 2+ SD’s above, are mostly shunned by women.

    Women don’t tend to tingle for men with 140ish IQ’s unless those guys are simultaneously blessed with marked dark triad traits, height, and good looks.

  116. Anonymous[232] • Disclaimer says:
    @Lincoln Blockface Squarebeard III

    Ditto linking IQ and race Why the excitement over these things?

    Well, the “excitement” comes from analysing real data or living and working in some of those shithole countries for years. I’ve done both and I can tell you with absolute certainty that average IQ matters. There’s a reason why most corporations built their factories in China (105 IQ) instead of India (82 IQ). There are other factors (stability, infrastructure etc.) but the average IQ rules.

    People like you are completely clueless. You’ve been brainwashed into believing that these people (and their offspring) are no different than Europeans:

    It simply doesn’t work like that in the real world. Please get yourself a passport and try to experience the world as it is.

    • Replies: @ricpic
    , @Corvinus
  117. ricpic says:

    Probably true. Absolutely hilarious.

  118. ricpic says:

    No one in that boat will write a string quartet.

  119. Corvinus says:

    “Well, the “excitement” comes from analysing real data or living and working in some of those shithole countries for years.”

    There are many reasons why some countries are “shitholes”. European “invade the world, invite the world” machinations certainly did not help matters.

    “There are other factors (stability, infrastructure etc.) but the average IQ rules.”

    No, it is one of several factors. Depends upon one’s mileage regarding the importance of IQ.

    People like you are completely clueless. You’ve been brainwashed into believing that these people (and their offspring) are no different than Europeans:

    “It simply doesn’t work like that in the real world. Please get yourself a passport and try to experience the world as it is.”

    I do. I have been to many places. The people there–white, black, yellow, red, brown–can be kind and considerate, or boorish and rude. Some are extremely gregarious, while others are more reticent. It’s called the art of being human and being humane.

    Try it sometime as a break from your routine.

    • Replies: @megabar
  120. @Anon

    Yeah, well, I would tell you to kiss my ass but you probably couldn’t reach it without a step stool.

  121. jim jones says:

    Whenever I encounter Yanks in London I am always disappointed that they do not look like Brad Pitt

  122. Meimou says:
    @jilles dykstra

    We judge based on the information we have. If the only info you have about someone is that they are a young black man you probably be weary of meeting him on a street at night.

    Now if you know he’s a doctor with a 140 IQ, you won’t be as worried cause you have more data.

  123. In the West today there are factors at work that are not included in this discussion. Furthermore, some of the factors lead to very different outcomes over time in the real world. I am now 71. When I was in high school there were boys more tall, broad-faced, athletic, well off, and handsome, but there were always shy girls with small tits that we could date. However, with each decade the situation improves for the little guy. Being thin and artistic turned out over the long run to be a much better deal. Playing a major team sport, especially American football, will considerably raise raise the odds statistically of many physical ailments over the years, and the boys who were really one of the guys, on the team, tended to drink a lot more, and for many this became a habit. Over time the number of men who are healthy and available for each healthy woman who is looking for one goes down. Women live longer too. So, when my wife of many years divorced me when I was in my 50s, I suddenly entered a dating scene were there were a lot more attractive, eligible women of my generation than men.

    All around the world men in ancient civilisations that had been literate for millennia were generally married to women who were five years younger. Today in America couples with that five year gap who marry have the highest chance statistically of never divorcing. Instinctively knowing the man should be little older or having learned about it subtly through culture may account for more of the preference for taller men than instinctively preferring tall ones. My wife, to whom I have been married for twelve years, is 66, five years my junior. When we first started living together I said that I probably could not have sex every day, day after day, so why don’t we skip it every forth day for a while, and see how that works. I never had to mention this again; we rarely deviate from the routine. Today when we came in from our daily walk, she said: “I assume this is day three,” meaning: “we are about to go at it again for the third day in a row, but tomorrow we’ll take a rest day.” The guys who really get the most and best sex in the end, and have the most children in the long run, these may well be a gang of short, narrow faced, men who have always been very careful about what they eat and drink. The whole ra ra sports bit the tall boys enjoyed may well have taken more of them off line than their hight advantage increased. And, they are more likely become a Marine or a fighter pilot, reducing survival odds yet again.

  124. megabar says:

    > The people there–white, black, yellow, red, brown–can be kind and considerate, or boorish and rude. Some are extremely gregarious, while others are more reticent. It’s called the art of being human and being humane.

    That’s a silly argument. No one disputes that individual people vary considerably.

    But when you talk about large groups, averages matter. People are shaped by the society they are part of, but they also in turn shape the society. As their numbers go up, the latter effect is more prevalent than the former.

    As more Africans move into a country, it is reasonable to believe that the country will take on more characteristics of an African country. Do you dispute this fact, or do you welcome it in order to be more humane?

  125. top psychology journals

    That phrase is of a piece with ‘smartest mongoloid’ or ‘slimmest hippopotamus’.

    Psych research is some of the worst-executed, least-replicable, pulled-out-of-my-ass garbage in the academic literature. It is endogenously worse than highly-conflicted pharma research.

    Imagine that: being worse than a research field known to be corrupted by money… but not even being paid for it – pharma researchers are bad ‘on purpose’ in exchange for the shekels; psych researchers are worse, just because of the low quality of entrants into the field.

    People from disciplines with higher standards have known this since the mid-20h century, but we can finally start to put some hard borders around it – the Cochrane Collaboration and other replication efforts (e.g., the Open Science Collaboration) have shown that less than 40% of ‘landmark’ psych studies were able to be replicated (see “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science” Science Vol. 349, Issue 6251, aac4716 DOI: 10.1126/science.aac4716 (28 Aug 2015).

    I think the authors should have put “Science” in scare-quotes, because there’s about as much ‘science’ in psych as there is in Creation “Science”, “Scient”-ology, or the Church of Jesus Christ, “Scientist”.
    That said: I would say that, wouldn’t I… as a tall, hairy, part-spear-chucker with a broad face and big hands… who graduated with a joint First (summa cum laude in US parlance) in a technical discipline from a university in the top two dozen in the world (at the time: my alma mater has slipped in the global rankings in the last 25 years, as its leadership corporatised and tried to emulate UCLA instead of the Ivy League/Oxbridge… like the old joke about the Jewish tailor: never mind the quality, feel the weight).

    Yes, my personal stats are an anecdote, and anecdotes aren’t data… however the hard data says that psych research should be rejected a priori until it’s confirmed by independent research conducted by someone outside the “discipline”.

  126. expat47 says:

    I served in the British Army in WW2. 72 inches in height and nutrition was impossible after 194o. Also, just saying women found me attractive. When it came to blacks, personally I like them, although they do have a casual act towards violence. Respect is very important to them; perhaps because of the awful treatment they have suffered.

  127. vladdy says:

    The undeniable urge to make negative comments about the president, even in articles that have nothing to do with him, is almost or would be humorous — except that it gives ammunition to those in the deep intelligence community who do the work of the globalist elites

  128. vladdy says:

    Bless you. I was thinking the same thing.

  129. Mefobills says:
    @Ju Ahn

    Some Chinese are quite attractive. It is you who has jumped to conclusions about something I didn’t say.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Lance Welton Comments via RSS
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism