@Swagnificent, why are you so OBSESSED with mixed children? It's 2020

[invalid]

So you don't agree with him on:
?

I thought I pointed out in my 1st and 2nd post what I agreed with him on.

Let me re-emphasize.

I agree with him on mixed people being more attractive than white people.

I’m comparing mixed people in relation to white people.

Nowhere in that statement did I make the assertion of the definitive attractiveness of mixed people against all other races of people.

If you want a more direct answer, the answer is no.

Btw, there is an important slip-up you and him committed by referring to the theory cited in the study you posted.

You both applied to hypothesis and theories describing the benefits of a genetically diverse background an ascientific concept: race.
For race is a social construct that is not even mentioned in the study. For good reasons: the genetic diversity amongst so-called races is so important that it often leads to individuals of different races being closer genetically together than a pair of the same race.

How Science and Genetics are Reshaping the Race Debate of the 21st Century - Science in the News

There are other factors that makes it a bad idea: one being that Africa is the most genetically diverse continent (by far) on Earth thanks to historical population movements.

In regards to the study you posted, that would make a kid from a Ghanaian father and a Kenyan mother extremely diverse in terms of genes... Without falling under the flawed umbrella of "mixed".

I didn’t make a slip up.

You either are 1) not comprehending my post or 2) looking for gotchas.

The slip up that you’re making is that you are thinking that I’m comparing mixed people to black people, which seems to be the basis of your thread, but I am not.

You’re preaching to the choir in this instance as I am well versed in the genetic diversity in Africans so I would not have made a mixed/Black comparison because the “genetic diversity” argument doesn’t work.

In fact, the first post I ever received warning points on here for was this;

Are you purposely being obtuse. An AADOS (Black person) would be more genetically related to an Englishman than a Somalian.

So I’ll say this again, mixed race people - Dominicans, Puerto-Ricans, Cubans, Brazilians, etc are more attractive to me than any 100% European peoples.

And I think most people on here would agree.

 

[old pig]

why is he obsessing over kids period?

 

[Balla]

In.

Where u been nikka?

 

[MischievousMonkey]

I thought I pointed out in my 1st and 2nd post what I agreed with him on.

Let me re-emphasize.



I’m comparing mixed people in relation to white people.

Nowhere in that statement did I make the assertion of the definitive attractiveness of mixed people against all other races of people.

If you want a more direct answer, the answer is no.



I didn’t make a slip up.

You either are 1) not comprehending my post or 2) looking for gotchas.

The slip up that you’re making is that you are thinking that I’m comparing mixed people to black people, which seems to be the basis of your thread, but I am not.

You’re preaching to the choir in this instance as I am well versed in the genetic diversity in Africans so I would not have made a mixed/Black comparison because the “genetic diversity” argument doesn’t work.

In fact, the first post I ever received warning points on here for was this;



So I’ll say this again, mixed race people - Dominicans, Puerto-Ricans, Cubans, Brazilians, etc are more attractive to me than any 100% European peoples.

And I think most people on here would agree.

Thank you for your direct answer.

I'm not looking for any gotcha moment. The goal of my thread is not to compare mixed people to Black people neither and I don't believe you do. I said the goal explicitly in my answer:

Mixed actually doesn't mean anything scientifically speaking. That's why I'm calling him out. This thread has no interest in debating preferences. Just cleaning up the mumbo jumbo some use to justify their own.

You said you agreed with him on part of his stance, but I wanted to know if you agreed with him on the "scientific" aspect of mixed race attractiveness, which is the subject of the thread. Hence my question.

I said you made a slip-up because while I asked you about the scientific aspect of your attraction to mixed people, you referred to a study about genetic diversity asking me whether or not that's what I was talking about. Like I said, the concept of mixed race and genetic diversity cannot be put together, so I couldn't understand why you would bring this up, unless you believed they were both the same as Swag does. My bad for inferring that.

 

[Low End Derrick]

He a idiot

hahahaha

thats funny

 

[Swagnificent]

Its true. What we find as attractive in the opposite sex are typically markers of genetic fitness. Its an evolutionary clue our ancestors got for who to mate with to produce the most genetically fit offspring possible. Its why we don't find sick or old people attractive. Its why we find people you are young and physically fit attractive.

Good looks are a signal for how good the genes who you have are.

 

[Swagnificent]

Swagnificent is what people on the coli and other places legitmately complain about.

He not just a pawger he a white worshipper and puts his own race down uplifiting whites.

He a idiot

Please cite one example where I have "put down [my] own race"? If anything I am the leading authority on black enpowerment education on this site.

Preferring to have sexual intercourse with SOME white women over SOME black women doesn't mean I am putting down my race. Its called expressing the truth. Everyone is attracted to good looking people of all races so stop fronting.

 

[Swagnificent]

Just checked the original thread.

Even if the assumption were true that they're prettier (obvious opinion btw) why would their beauty imply that they were superior as far as being smarter, faster, impervious to disease, etc...?

Good looks were a cheat code for our ancestors on who to mate with. Sexual reproduction is biologically the key to life so you are genetically programmed to mate with the best person possible.

For example, the one female trait men across every culture find attractive is wide hips (i.e. the classic hourglass shape). No man finds very narrow hips attractive on a woman. Why is that? Because wide hips are a biological signal that the woman will be able to give birth to kids. Human babies have abnormally big heads when they are born thus women had to evolve wide hips to give birth to them. As men we are genetically programmed to prefer wide hips as a way to ensure our children can survive childbirth.

Almost every other thing as find sexually attractive in the opposite sex has a similar biological advantage.

 

[13473]

If more an more blacks think like him the Kenya Moores an Justine sky wont exist!!!!

Maybe Kenya wouldn't exist

But Justine has a biracial parent so technically blacks lusting biracials would lead to people like Justine

 

[GhettoTeK]

He just want to go pawg fat beckys

 

[010101]

heterosis is a real thing

@Swagnificent is a troll though & that's on all topics

ha

*

 

[MischievousMonkey]

Good looks were a cheat code for our ancestors on who to mate with. Sexual reproduction is biologically the key to life so you are genetically programmed to mate with the best person possible.

For example, the one female trait men across every culture find attractive is wide hips (i.e. the classic hourglass shape). No man finds very narrow hips attractive on a woman. Why is that? Because wide hips are a biological signal that the woman will be able to give birth to kids. Human babies have abnormally big heads when they are born thus women had to evolve wide hips to give birth to them. As men we are genetically programmed to prefer wide hips as a way to ensure our children can survive childbirth.

Almost every other thing as find sexually attractive in the opposite sex has a similar biological advantage.

Not even going to get you on this point... It doesn't address the vast differences in what humans find attractive across cultures & and history and is easy to deconstruct.

Spoiler

Lemme do my thing real quick...

In the Paleolithic that's what ancestors fukked with...

Ancient Greeks fukked with chubby chicks with no hips and mediocre ass

Middle Age... Renaissance... Slim fatties and fat chicks are in... Because it's a symbol that you eat well... Slim goodies as we know them today were seen as unhealthy and broke

Fast forward a couple centuries and Hollywood and now this is the new standard in Western society:

The littlest fat as possible is the new ideal... Thin is now healthy looking.



But now that there's another shift towards more thickness and curves (majorly due to BW)

all of a sudden this shyt supposed to be unnatural, or an indicator of whatever arbitrary standards

Stop it... Some of yall just can't handle differences in taste like grown adults... Trying to feel better than the next man because you like a particular shape. Goofy shyt

Nah... Do you have any source or evidence that "mixed people" are in general more attractive than others besides your own taste?

 

[Will Ross]

pure blood is stronger than mixed breed.

 

[Solo ✧✦✧]

Everything he said is factual. Great poster.

 

[MischievousMonkey]

heterosis is a real thing

@Swagnificent is a troll though & that's on all topics

ha

*

Like we discussed with other homie earlier in the thread... Swagnificent is applying nonsensical (as far as science is concerned) racial constructs to a scientific matter that is heterosis.

It's that XIXth-early XXth proto-racist "science". Almost back to cranium measurements.

If we pretend to talk science let's go all the way then