HOW MANY OF YOU MANLETS ARE ON THIS REDDIT SUB?!

Nah it’s true man the groups I mentioned are a result tall even when malnourished height is somewhat genetic. Now for southern Nigerian as an example yes they need food to be tall or they will be like 5’6-7 manlets but if you feed them most will become 5’10+. But Senegalese (other west African) are just built tall even when starving
Are those median heights? It’s probably skewed by well fed moggers
 
That’s a bit misleading given the role environment & nutrition plays in height
literally everyone gets a chance to pass on their genes as long as they're not a midget. Height comes from economic status and nutrition especially in 1960s europe when the average person was still 5'8
 
  • +1
Reactions: LooksmaxxHopeful and Deleted member 4362
Are those median heights? It’s probably skewed by well fed moggers
Avg height for the groups I mentioned. It’s not skewed esp in africa the poorest place on the planet and the onyl continent where most countries lost 2 inches of height since the 60s. The whole worlds growing but Africas shrinking
 
I think the rapid expansion in sub saharan africas population size will only lead to catastrophic events such as mass famines, civil wars, ethnic conflicts, genocide and so on
Its not sustainable and will eventually slow down
It will slow down, but the rate it slows down at depends on IQ, hence I don't hold much hope.

The developed world, if u take out immigrants, are already below replacement ratio in fertility rate. So is China, India will peak around 1.7-8bn, the non poverty class is already below replacement ratio. Indonesia won't grow much beyond 300m TOPs.

Meanwhile most developed country in what corporations define as SSA is Nigeria, and that's gonna grow to as much as 700m or could be higher jfl.

Congo, Tanzania, Mozambique, Uganda, and all the other shitholes are going to triple before they MIGHT slow.

Even ethnics in all their countries, except the really sparse ones like Saudi, are slowing down jfl
 
It equalized by the time it reach 1980s, the height was probably a proxy for economic status


In modern societies height doesn't correlate with ability to have children

"

The peak number of children, 2.57, was found in men who were 177.79cm. Men who were 6cm taller or shorter (coming in at approximately 5ft 7in or 6ft) had 2.52 children. Going another 6cm away from the peak gave 2.36 children on average.
"

Meaning men who are 6'3" have less children than men who are 5'8"
interesting
although using this logic being a low iq criminal with ADHD is an indicator of genetic superiority seeing as they have a high fertility rate

personally I think whatever is deemed attractive by the opposite sex is a sign of genetic superiority hence being tall = genetically superior

- Over 94% of women reject men for being "too short"

- Women are happiest with their partner's heights when they are 8.24" inches taller then them

- Short men have twice the suicide rate of tall men

- Taller men have more partners and father more children (kinda contradicts the bbc study)



Anyway, everything points towards having a great deal of height as an indicator of good genes
 
  • +1
Reactions: LooksmaxxHopeful
interesting
although using this logic being a low iq criminal with ADHD is an indicator of genetic superiority seeing as they have a high fertility rate

personally I think whatever is deemed attractive by the opposite sex is a sign of genetic superiority hence being tall = genetically superior

- Over 94% of women reject men for being "too short"

- Women are happiest with their partner's heights when they are 8.24" inches taller then them

- Short men have twice the suicide rate of tall men

- Taller men have more partners and father more children (kinda contradicts the bbc study)



Anyway, everything points towards having a great deal of height as an indicator of good genes
in the advent of birth control and state daddy's women can fuck around with tall good looking niggas and then just have kids with normal/manlet men who are more likely to stick around
 
  • +1
Reactions: p0lishsubhuman and Deleted member 21340
That doesn't make a lot of sense due to the sole fact that the average height is increasing and has been increasing for the past millennia
Now sure you could maybe try to attribute this to the factor of the environment improving thus making it easier for people to fulfil their genetic potential

But we know that height is highly heritable, having a heritability rate of around 0.8. Meaning, tall people have tall children, small people have small children etc
Put 1+1 together and you come the conclusion that the average height is increasing because people who are taller than average are having more children

This theory has also been proven by multiple studies, one being this which explains why the dutch are so tall
- For men, there was a curvilinear effect of height on reproductive success, with taller than average men producing both a larger number of ever born children and more surviving children
Also there are more males born than females born, so it's inevitable that some males get left out and it's obvious that genetic quality is the primary filter used.
 
I think the rapid expansion in sub saharan africas population size will only lead to catastrophic events such as mass famines, civil wars, ethnic conflicts, genocide and so on
Its not sustainable and will eventually slow down
It's already is slowing down, birth rates are rapidly declining in Africa.

South Korea used to have high birth rates before industrialization, once people move from the rural to urban areas birth rates will decline drastically like they did everywhere else

1669827138950


1669827186953
 
interesting
although using this logic being a low iq criminal with ADHD is an indicator of genetic superiority seeing as they have a high fertility rate

personally I think whatever is deemed attractive by the opposite sex is a sign of genetic superiority hence being tall = genetically superior

- Over 94% of women reject men for being "too short"

- Women are happiest with their partner's heights when they are 8.24" inches taller then them

- Short men have twice the suicide rate of tall men

- Taller men have more partners and father more children (kinda contradicts the bbc study)



Anyway, everything points towards having a great deal of height as an indicator of good genes
" whatever is deemed attractive by the opposite sex is a sign of genetic superiority"

Agreed, it's as simple as this.

And no being rich doesn't make you genetically superior, wanting to date a rich person isn't about genuine sexual desire but wanting to improve your situation.

This is why sexual attraction didn't play a huge role in the past because survival trumps everything else, now with industrialized society people's genuine sexual preferences are more and more being the only determinant.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 21340
76C1A45E 0235 4296 BCC0 A2A41F7AEB8F
Jfl who posted this
 
At what heught do u think tall halo starts were u
It will slow down, but the rate it slows down at depends on IQ, hence I don't hold much hope.

The developed world, if u take out immigrants, are already below replacement ratio in fertility rate. So is China, India will peak around 1.7-8bn, the non poverty class is already below replacement ratio. Indonesia won't grow much beyond 300m TOPs.

Meanwhile most developed country in what corporations define as SSA is Nigeria, and that's gonna grow to as much as 700m or could be higher jfl.

Congo, Tanzania, Mozambique, Uganda, and all the other shitholes are going to triple before they MIGHT slow.

Even ethnics in all their countries, except the really sparse ones like Saudi, are slowing down jfl
Live
@Chinacurry
 
At what heught do u think tall halo starts were u

Live
@Chinacurry
In uk, you'd be called out as tall once you're 6'3", and short once you're 5'8", so a big range.

In Hong Kong you'd be clear out as tall once you're 6', as short once you're 5'5"
 
  • +1
Reactions: horizontallytall
Jfl there is no ethnic tax in Europe at all (possibly in Spain cos swarthy dark looks are seen as less refined than fully white visigoth Iberian looks, they would prefer Sergio Ramos over Madrid legend Raul, for example).

Aside from that there's no ethnic tax if ur GL, robust, broad, not short, forward grown face, and not low T.

There's minimal ethnic tax in large USA or UK cities too, same ID say for Australia despite people saying it's most racist country by fat.

Prob only place there is ethnic tax would be, IMO, Honk Kong, Korea, and poss Singapore but can't say for sure.

“Ethnic tax” is just “Caucasians are better looking on average”

Being GL as white is probably 1 in 30, black is 1 in 100, dravinian is 1 in 1000, and so on
 
  • +1
Reactions: Chinacurry

Similar threads

StraightHeadJames
Replies
36
Views
1K
castizo_ascender
castizo_ascender
B
Replies
19
Views
1K
brutal_blackpill
B
6ft4
Replies
1
Views
419
infini
infini
TrueNateJacobs
Replies
10
Views
618
ForeignType
F
asdvek
Replies
14
Views
619
Lefty Rankin
Lefty Rankin

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top