Right-wingers are different

It’s that time of year for a study-dump. Read until the end.

Better-looking (on AVERAGE):

“Good-looking individuals are more likely to have right-wing political views than less physically attractive people, according to a university study.
The authors of the report, Rolfe D. Peterson from the US Susquehanna University and Carl L. Palmer from the Illinois State University, examined the connection between physical attractiveness and political beliefs, applying multiple surveys measuring people’s attractiveness.
“More attractive individuals are more politically efficacious than their peers and more likely to identify as conservative and Republican than less physically attractive citizens of comparable demographic backgrounds,” the report read.”

Comparable demographic background, an important control.

Better-looking again:
PDF at: https://about.illinoisstate.edu/clpalme/Documents/Peterson%20Palmer%20The%20Effects%20of%20Physical%20Attractiveness%20on%20Political%20Attitudes.pdf

“Controlling for socioeconomic status, we find that more attractive individuals are more likely to report higher levels of political efficacy, identify as conservative, and identify as Republican.”

SES control is important.


“Politicians on the right look more beautiful in Europe, the U.S. and Australia.”

How to tell May isn’t really right-wing.

They should also study disease load (emphasizing STDs, which do affect appearance) compared to partisanship.

Support meritocracy, oppose the cult of equalism:

“Higher self-perceived attractiveness (SPA) increased support for inequality.”

Self-perceived, relative.

Have a ‘look’:

“The political sympathies of scholars can be accurately assessed from photographs.”
“In contrast to politicians, Right-leaning scholars were not more attractive.”

The scholars haven’t hired image consultants.

What, do you think a man buys an expensive suit just for the suit?

“Right-leaning scholars were better groomed.
Controlling for grooming, Left-leaning scholars were more attractive”

This is supposed to be looking at genetic attractiveness, true attractiveness, not clothing/haircare/make-up?
Okay, I’ll let them have that one. They’re better at faking it, a trait of narcissism.

Less likely to cheat when expected to cooperate:

Neurologically different:

“Political Orientations Are Correlated with Brain Structure in Young Adults”

So they’re more gender neutral in the brain?
Because the same IQ can still be produced by structural differences between the sexes.


“”These findings suggest that human evolution has created two different types of brains designed for equally intelligent behavior,” says researcher Richard Haier, professor of psychology at the University of California, Irvine, in a news release. “In addition, by pinpointing these gender-based intelligence areas, the study has the potential to aid research on dementia and other cognitive impairment diseases in the brain”

Again, the same IQ score.


Man Card isn’t a MENSA card, accomplish something.

Sexual dimorphism didn’t stop at the neck.

But white matter is generally more important for HIGH IQ:
White matter could only be imaged recently.


Although grey matter can matter too, white matter cannot be denied EITHER:

Positive relationships were found between FSIQ and intracranial gray and white matter but not cerebrospinal fluid volumes. Significant associations with cortical thickness were evident bilaterally in prefrontal (Brodmann’s areas [BAs] 10/11, 47)

IQ so real you can scan someone’s brain, almost.

and posterior temporal cortices (BA 36/37) and proximal regions.

Sex influenced regional relationships;

Before any sexist bitch goes to twist this, different does not mean inferior. This is a study of intelligence, NOT stupidity.

You can’t prove a negative and individuals are not groups?

The obvious pointed out? Okay, let’s continue.

women showed correlations in prefrontal and temporal association cortices, whereas men exhibited correlations primarily in temporal–occipital association cortices.


An idiot reading that would assume women are smarter, prefrontal doesn’t always mean smarter, necessarily, it’s just a group-level skew of structural difference. However, it does explain the higher female average.

Again, average.

In healthy adults,

important distinction, many brain studies are conducted on the undeveloped (teens) or pathologies

neither of which generalize to a HEALTHY, ADULT population

[sorry for the smart people tuning in, idiots twist what I type]


Plot twist: both matter.

Almost like we evolved.

Variations in prefrontal and posterior temporal cortical thickness are particularly linked with intellectual ability.

PF – registered as female strength, generally.
PT – registered as male and female strengths, generally.

This isn’t better/worse, it’s apples/oranges.

Even race overwhelms sex as a confound in IQ (so does class, education etc).

Sex moderates regional relationships that may index dimorphisms in cognitive abilities, overall processing strategies, or differences in structural organization.”

Trans. sex differences real yo.

Overall, key word.

Moderates, may index, differences. As in, these processes still occur but like a road trip, each take different paths different enough to map but not distinct enough to be unrecognizable.


Estrogen, which men also NATURALLY produce, also boosts brainpower.
Study here but my commentary explains it:
Whereas, everyone knows, testosterone (which women also produce) correlates to violence.
Nothing is all-good, all-bad in hormones.
“A moment of silence for all the women in history who married dumber men.”

They should study political economic wing and compare it to natural/un-supplemented hormone levels.
As in, a man who ‘needs’ steroids for vanity is less of a man.

They should also look at whether men going onto steroids drop in IQ score because it competes with their organic estrogen that makes them handle stressors better.

[Update: after checking, they did. Here it is.]


“long-term high-dose AAS exposure may cause cognitive deficits, notably in visuospatial memory.”

“These results remained stable in sensitivity analyses addressing potential confounding factors.”
The dumb jock stereotype is true!


It gets better!

Actually, it causes brain damage!
This is amazing!

Fake masculinity is really bad for men. You can’t cheat code becoming a man.


Long-term AAS use is associated with right amygdala enlargement and reduced right amygdala rsFC with brain areas involved in cognitive control and spatial memory, which could contribute to the psychiatric effects and cognitive dysfunction associated with AAS use.

The MRS abnormalities we detected could reflect enhanced glutamate turnover and increased vulnerability to neurotoxic or neurodegenerative processes, which could contribute to AAS-associated cognitive dysfunction.

Now the right amygdala enlargement sounds like the natural conservative difference but understand it’s rooted, not in experience and genuine masculine virtue, but chemical dependence. Without the drugs, it’ll shrink right back and possibly atrophy.

This would be like congratulating a tall guy who took HGH for his superior genetics. No. It’s a superficial, fake result.

The cognitive control is impaired, that’s regression. The meat head stereotype is true, biologically. Useless.

I wonder how many male suicides were on steroids? Both groups happen to be middle-aged men in fear of the Wall.

Whatever the details, it makes them biologically vulnerable compared to their natural state, the opposite of fitness.

Ironically, they’re more vulnerable to microplastics and xenoestrogens. 

To further screw the point in… that brain region explicitly mentioned?

Right amygdala rsFC study:

“In high HA scorers, we also observed stronger right amygdala rsFC with the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC), which is implicated in negative affect regulation.”
It’s a girly brain thing to do with harm avoidance. [aka common sense]
“may represent a vulnerability marker for sensitivity to stress and anxiety (disorders).”
So the meat head with reduced volume (therefore not conservative*) is dumber, senses dulled by drugs and more likely to fail to get the brain signals to avoid trouble. Sounds like a future in handcuffs. They can’t perceive danger nor regulate negative emotions like anger or shame after rejection. Basically, they’re future chimp-outs waiting to happen, whatever their race**. Less able to CONTROL emotions, the broflakes.***

Hair-trigger temper calling out people for looking at him.

The guy who picks on people but never actually expects to get hit.

Will grab a woman and be shocked she slaps him. That’s the one.

*because, again “greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala.”

[as referenced above]

yet they have less?

So steroids make men more left wing. It isn’t the correct area and type to be considered otherwise.



My guess is it messes with their sexual reward system and produces impotence, porn addiction, dissatisfaction.


Steroids do cause impotence (PC term is ED). Does it lower sperm count?



“Anabolic steroids abuse and male infertility”

I am good at this.



hypogonadism = tiny balls

“In layman’s terms, it is sometimes called interrupted stage 1 puberty”

You’d have to be a moron already to think supplementing that shit makes you manly.

Nice muscles bro, shame you hit rewind on puberty!

They impair their body’s ability to naturally produce testosterone in future…. idiots.

Darwin Award category?

Big Pharma’s best customer? Like Israel’s Viagra use. Israel and America, top consumers.



**Logically we should restrict steroid use to lower the crime rate. We can’t have gorilla people chimping out and blaming da drugs.

***There are few things less masculine than a man who throws tantrums because Hulk RAGE entitlement. The mantrum has neurological correlates, as we can see.

As for the ACC lefty brain finding:


..I didn’t forget.

“Through these connections, the ACC is thought to be involved with a number of functions related to emotion including the regulation of overall affect, assigning emotions to internal and external stimuli, and making vocalizations associated with the expression of states or desires.

No comment.

The ACC also seems to contribute to the regulation of autonomic and endocrine responses, pain perception, and the selection and initiation of motor movements. Additionally, there are other areas of the ACC that are involved in various aspects of cognition ranging from decision-making to the management of social behavior.”

And about sexual potency….

I order these for a reason.

Right-wingers more sexually satisfied:


“A new YouGov survey, which asked over 19,000 participants from the UK, France, Germany, Sweden and Denmark about both their politics and their sex lives, has found conservatives to be happier in the bedroom than liberals, with those identifying as “very right-wing” found to be the happiest.”

So much for the benefits of slutting. Muh experience. Yes, experiencing a burning sensation.

If you want a better sex life, don’t be a manwhore.
Chastity is a virtue. Less stress when single, hot sex when married.


Sluts reee.

I deserve an Ig Nobel for all this connection-making. It could save the West.


While I’m putting out fires imagined by shrill men.

Click through.


Boys should be fragrance-free

You like skincare, huh? K.


And you’d be amazed how many “male” colognes contain lavender or rose, the latter of which hasn’t really been studied but if I were a man, I wouldn’t risk it.



Called “Ultra Male”

will ironically give you bitch tits.

I swear the fags are fucking with us.

Tom Ford boasted his vision was making straight men smell like gay dick.

I have grounds.

While men are the display sex of our species, they shouldn’t be the alluring, pretty, seductive-looking and smelling one. Y’all are idiots if you fall for metrosexual branding attempts to keep the exact same chemical ingredients and hock it in a blue or black bottle.

At least buy something cheaper with the same cheap ingredients?



“Lots of people have asked me if I’m wearing Tom Ford – enough said”


Make-up dupes exist and so do perfume ones. Entire sites list these. Don’t go broke smelling like cheap car leather. What they won’t tell you is that large branding celebrity houses often rip off the little guy so the cheaper thing called a dupe is frequently the original.

Male colognes tend to include so many irritants (smokey, woodsy, grassy ingredients) you’re practically guaranteed to develop allergies over time, in particular


at the application site from chemical exposure, made so, so much worse by citrus oils and UV-enriched sun exposure.

Bergamot is the worst. You wouldn’t rub it on your neck so why.

It smells like Earl Grey to me.

Bergamot is really big in colognes.



All for the bragging rights of purchasing the highest-status smelly water.

And what do we also have here?


Great if you want to smell like Queen Victoria’s bloomers.

Fuck it, I’m going to go full bitch mode.

What’s next, a bottle of a statue of Priapus? Okay, I’m done.

Female power in the occult


Reminds me of Taoism.
Taoism doesn’t actually have sexual practices (however some have twisted it to try and claim they do) for that reason. It is the spiritual overcoming the physical. To “de-base” yourself again completely extinguishes the work already built on. Monasteries and nunneries were rooted in this idea.

The wise men don’t want to be drained (and by strangers) and be thrown off with bad karma (like a creative block or stumped feeling, apathy or obstacle event). Action —> Result. You choose one, you choose the other.
Historically a promiscuous man is considered weak in all religions (except Satanism, you’ll note*) because the male path of enlightenment involves impulse control, that’s the male power. Think of a military general. A promiscuous woman gives up something that is (because of her chosen condition) worth nothing, quite a disgusting notion to people who believe in sanctity, and promiscuous men also don’t value their energies as special either, so their own influence disappears from themselves like morning dew (and they typically blame women for ‘tempting them’, projecting the problem is typical). This leads to a permanent dissolving of willpower (death of will) eventually, they call it “player burnout” online but it’s really like tapping your own veins and draining your blood then wondering why you’re weak. Idiots with scant self-awareness had little influence to spare in the first place, and so drain themselves into a curious blend of melancholy, apathy and furious self-pity faster than other, hardier men. Celibate men were respected in saner times because they had power (of the self) and this produced a laser-like focus and it’s no coincidence so many geniuses did their best work while surrendering sexually to no women.

How much bland art was clearly made by a degenerate who slept with the subjects?

How much great art was made by homosexual men, who couldn’t possibly be tempted by a woman? (or married hetero men for other reasons).

How does the art of each make you feel? Typically, the first makes people feel unclean but the latter a strange purity.

Women seen as inspiration on a collective level strengthens a man.

To surrender sexually to an improper woman or to be an improper man individually is draining (like the trail of bad luck following degeneracy that can even be seen in statistics like suicide risk). At best, the man tries to take on a female role (Lord Byron hoovering up muse figures, Wilde the same with men) and this is repellent to those who believe that men should be masculine (most men, back then) and stand firm in their principles. This is the ultimate cause of those principles and as you can see, it isn’t a double standard at all. If women aren’t meant to sleep around, that implies directly men aren’t meant to either, otherwise they’d have to become homosexual. Patriarchies protect men from wasting themselves by masturbating inside various women (it’s a loveless union) although when it overdoes this or for unclear reasons lost over time, the subjects assume it’s keeping them away from the “fun” (a child’s assumption) because they don’t understand the risk or threat to themselves. It goes beyond themselves individually too; to family name, personal social reputation, family estate and fortune, future marriage prospects, shaming their friends with bad company and associations and so on. At minimum, it lumbers others with awkwardness, selfishly. A man’s responsibilities in society forbid dalliance with the underworld elements. It always resurfaces somewhat with the degenerate, sin sticks to them, however they might appear unscathed to shallow people. If everyone ate from the cookie jar, the tragedy of the commons would pretty much provide what we consider a Third World society. It would be unruly and the individuals selfish, feral and uncivilized. We’re well on that course because, since women can’t rein the men in (and some are Satanic, hating men and encouraging their destruction**) then who is supposed to play father to men who shunned that powerful leadership role of their own sex? Men are too PC with one another and standards died as a result. It’s a youth cult that makes them wish they were Peter Pans, never changing or learning or taking on duties, stuck in a hedonic purgatory, like being dutiful is shameful and up is down. The manchild doesn’t rebel so this shift was planned. Where is the honour in such people? Natural slaves.

They don’t have dignity to value themselves beyond a performing phallus, integrity to choose their hobbies and friends wisely, they don’t know the value of hard work (bitching on twitter is not work) nor the satisfaction of being useful to your kin and the relief that duty brings the salt of the earth character.

They assume everyone is jealous of them (projection) because they cannot comprehend how lower impulses can disappear entirely when you realize their illusory nature (best known in Buddhism but Jesus embodies it too).

Most modern men would surrender to Satan in the desert after one hour for a glass of cold water and a shiny car.

No wonder women don’t respect that and ignore it for distractions like career, hoping it’ll go away and they’ll police their own standards in their sex eventually. Like, stop wearing your trousers round your ankles, for one. That’s an easy one. Women by definition cannot play father to a man and guide him like this, playing mother is enabling (and sexually repulsive) and the smarter ones don’t want to encourage it unless they hate men.

Corruption is the rotten apple spoiling the barrel. When it comes to rampant hypersexualization in society, consider the source. Do you think various pajama boys would get away with it, if they didn’t get the biological kick of orgasms as a reward (from porn or a woman in person)? What you reward, you encourage. We encourage indolence, insolence and weakness (this was the intentional product of the ‘Sexual Revolution’ in destroying Western Men). A man loyal to more than one nation is a traitor, what is a man loyal to more than one woman?

…Useless to either, at best. A burden, like an overgrown child.

Like the self-proclaimed family man avoiding his wife and children for a ‘mistress’. I’m sure that doesn’t mess them up at all….

Male power involves as much discernment as the female, for different reasons, throughout all religions. Chastity benefits men in their personal life more than women although it is a virtue for both (power for the male, discernment for the female). Lust is a deadly sin especially for men although modernity has encouraged you to forget this and disturbingly, treat it as the ultimate virtue of a man (to lose himself). They never expressly say what form Satan assumed in the desert to tempt Jesus, I assume female (although the energy of all Devil figures is very destructive and not at all nurturing). I think the #MeToo stuff is triggering the weaker men because it exposes their loss of control which they had believed was cunning concealed from women. Logically, they claim they want tougher punishments on all criminals, including hanging and I’m sure they’d change their tune if it involved their mother/sister/daughter. To personally identify with various types of rapist (including those who target men or boys) shows how weak the modern character is. Everyone gets tempted by things from time to time. So what?

It’s a test, you’re supposed to be strong. These are the defective ‘beautiful ones’ who believe gym gains and sickly cologne make up for their defective and subhuman nature. Metrosexuals don’t survive various societal corrections. Their first impulse on seeing beauty is corruption and degeneracy, much like the rapists they empathize with (instead of their victims like a man with a conscience would).

If you transported them back to the 50s they sexually fantasize about, where the streets were apparently full of young, thin and femininely dressed women, they’d be Ted Bundy. “But they looked really sexy!” level of retarded entitlement. They actually think tease is an insult (women are supposed to look like it) and temptation is an excuse for crime.

Your lust is your business. Picture a fat person blaming cake. Just because you’re triggered doesn’t give you any rights or privileges to get what you want. If so, every time I walk past a jewelry shop and they don’t shower me in diamonds, they must be taunting me. I want it, they’ve got it, what’s the problem? Why can’t I always get what I want? (Women want more from life than men so this is a very good example, nesting instinct means men would still come out with less). It’s just an excuse for anger, popping off like an irritable toddler, it’s the sexual equivalent of road rage. (Ragequitting from women, expressed in hatred of becoming a husband, is actually funny to women – they’re complaining they’d make a bad husband who’d make a bad choice of wife). Mantrums are embarrassing, they’re announcing, proudly how unfit they are. It’s like misogynistic Trigglypuff. They act like women are chasing after them down the street with a veil and false pregnancy positive.

If it’s so bad, get castrated. Honestly, if being horny provokes so much suffering or you are so self-destructive as to hand a rope to a misandrist in fucking one. Chemical castration seems to be a popular option nowadays. They assume women and their hormonal profile don’t feel temptation (HA) and by the time they come to the truth that the problem is them (and not all men) they want to switch back because men get away with more weakness (boys will be boys, weak men turn a blind eye to one another). Eventually they’ll get swept up in a war, probably civil war.

nb *Because Satanism isn’t a religion, it’s anti-religion, it intends to destroy men by encouraging their weakness and worst impulses. Rationalizations are the best way to accomplish this, stupid men are very gullible to any idea that makes them feel strong or impressive, because this way they can delude themselves and appear to have their cake and eat it.

**Remember when the SJWs openly screeched that Trump supporters wouldn’t sleep with them? It’s the witch with the poison apple, come on. It’s the only way they can corrupt and influence men, wasting their energy that could be put toward MAGA and other greatness.

Explaining shit like that.

There’s wasting time, then there’s a Margaret Thatcher colouring book.

Why do they think female rapists exist and the Bible says to avoid seductive women? Whether you think you want them or not, they’re sexual predators. Of course they’ll ruin your life if you let them, that’s what predators do! Stop encouraging them.

This post also clarifies this section of the Bible.

God made femininity and not to have something to shame or corrupt.

Men rejecting masculinity








“Its supporters soon tired of tedious and repetitive debates,

with their navel


And failed, clue.

Nothing they say is original. They’re multicultural monstrosities.





Cowardly r-types.



In their own ideal society, they’d be rejects!

They have no excuse.



Shame is GOOD.


I’d know.










If we live in clown world, send in the clowns…





It’s just the dysgenic men too proud to become blatant SJWs. 


You can’t sympathize with people who hate you and your people.

Why won’t women be right wing?

Because you date and marry the slutty Lefties.

Reinforcement, look it up. Women will become whatever gets them the wedding, as much as I hate to say it. What men actually, actively decide to prefer becomes the norm. Where’s the incentive to be anything other than a fat, ugly slut when you’ll get the guy who pretends to have principles anyway? Meanwhile, laughing at him behind his back. They really think these women respect them. They treat their man’s right-wing politics like a parent treats their kid’s crappy crayon drawing and make no bones about telling everyone they ever met (I have heard the long-suffering rants) how silly and crazy he is. Look at her expression. Note the regular piggish features further warped by sneering contempt. When she eventually burns him (probably in divorce, biggest predictor is contempt) he’ll blame all women… when this was totally r/K. He made a shitty decision and shitty things will happen. Men have 100% selection power in who they ask out and propose to, and selection is most of what makes a marriage a success or failure.
The cucking right brings shame on us all. If you can stand to tolerate that shit tier of human being, let alone love it, don’t pretend to be so hardcore.

Sex is deliberately the bait, the one thing they have to attract good quality men and you’re still falling for it? What kind of red pill is that? They have nothing else to offer but these guys are so deluded they assume she’ll change her mind or dating won’t become marriage and kids. “30 is not the new 20”, never date shitty people.

You think women don’t notice?

Families used to have to filter out slutty women from marriage considerations because yes, men are really that dumb (Defoe bitched about it!). They will ruin their whole family and entire line for endorphin pumps. We forget arranged marriages restricted men too, and also to protect them from their own stupidity. The divorce rate is largely the fault of men thinking that lust matches are somehow smarter.

The manosphere falls on deaf ears or mockery because it claims men can be ruined by women… except they’re not actually “ruined” (way to sound like a dunce, contradict yourself)…. and somehow women can’t be ruined by men, ever. Lies to evade guilt.

Men vindicate the worst women by approving them in how they behave. Every “man” is nice to the sluts hoping to get a leg over. So for fifty years, more sluts. It isn’t shallow to want to be treated nicely, that’s a big thing for women. Sluts are treated now, how ladies used to be treated. Stop paying attention to the sluts (shaming works but isn’t necessary) and younger women will notice.

Then there’s how fake right-wingers treat the good women:

“Let’s talk to all women like whores! …Why do they hate me?”

Basic dignity?