I honestly thought Arcane was posting satire, but he's a fairly straightforward person it seems from previous comments. Pearl is confident enough to buck the feminist trend, but ultimately comes off as a "pick-me" girl. She is to "trad-wives" what Shapiro is to "based/right-wing/etc."
6 at best on the looks--if you're into redheads. Misco…
I honestly thought Arcane was posting satire, but he's a fairly straightforward person it seems from previous comments. Pearl is confident enough to buck the feminist trend, but ultimately comes off as a "pick-me" girl. She is to "trad-wives" what Shapiro is to "based/right-wing/etc."
6 at best on the looks--if you're into redheads. Miscommunication due to medium of text? Or genuine difference in personal desires?
There's another possibility, too. I can sense superior genetics at a glance. Long before science caught up with me, I already knew instinctively they were a better breed of women from as early as 6 years old. I have always known these things. Did you already know that, Vox? Shows you the gulf in perception. I'm not red haired, how do I know so much pre-loaded instinctual information about redheads without any external cues? Everybody thinks ginger women are frail and somehow damaged. In fact their bones are nearly 2x harder than ordinary females and they have far greater muscular strength. Imagine the variance in instinctual knowledge about the world that exists there.
The planet is normally freezing. All the types of women here are just decline variations during the Holocene. When the natural temperature returns, redheaded women are literally the only females in town adapted correctly to survive here. Other types of females are a kind of grasshopper that flourishes briefly here during this 12,000 year window of warmth and then are gone. How do I know the exact opposite is true of almost every single common assumption about the world? You might mistake me for a native as well.
I guess it's more important to you to classify anyone who disagrees as defective somehow. In the next breath you will say it's only science. But the science doesn't agree with you. It says redheads are honestly superhuman.
They may be better. I don't know. But regardless, better isn't more beautiful.
A brick is less fragile than a Venetian glass. But it is not more beautiful because of that.
You have it precisely backwards. The cherry blossoms are all the more beautiful for their transience, not less.
There is nothing intrinsically defective about lower social rank. It has nothing to do with disagreeing with me. I simply observe what is and reality will reliably support my observations.
I know absolutely nothing about Pearl, but I predict that If you look at whomever she has been dating, they will not be handsome, high-status men. She can't attract them.
I didn't see Charlton Heston pulling top quality chimp girls in PLANET OF THE APES. They didn't place much value on him. He also had different standards just as I do. My priority seems to be mate and offspring survival. And better genes. If you'll look around you'll see mankind appears to have different criteria now and it has resulted in an average IQ of 94 with enough disease and disability that the whole business of reproduction becomes moot, doesn't it? If you are survived by children who look like gibbons where is the benefit?
Too much high school in these modern standards, same as any third world country. Men are not life support systems for a pair of testicles. Everything else ends with the BBL circus.
Inside the hierarchy, it can be difficult at times to draw a line between objective and subjective ratings when personalities are involved. Looking forward to your future posts!
I honestly thought Arcane was posting satire, but he's a fairly straightforward person it seems from previous comments. Pearl is confident enough to buck the feminist trend, but ultimately comes off as a "pick-me" girl. She is to "trad-wives" what Shapiro is to "based/right-wing/etc."
6 at best on the looks--if you're into redheads. Miscommunication due to medium of text? Or genuine difference in personal desires?
Men who are lower on the SSH always significantly overrate the lower tier women. They don't even register the higher tier women.
It's actually a gift, when you think about it. It's entirely normal. And it's an observable tell when you don't have any direct information.
There's another possibility, too. I can sense superior genetics at a glance. Long before science caught up with me, I already knew instinctively they were a better breed of women from as early as 6 years old. I have always known these things. Did you already know that, Vox? Shows you the gulf in perception. I'm not red haired, how do I know so much pre-loaded instinctual information about redheads without any external cues? Everybody thinks ginger women are frail and somehow damaged. In fact their bones are nearly 2x harder than ordinary females and they have far greater muscular strength. Imagine the variance in instinctual knowledge about the world that exists there.
The planet is normally freezing. All the types of women here are just decline variations during the Holocene. When the natural temperature returns, redheaded women are literally the only females in town adapted correctly to survive here. Other types of females are a kind of grasshopper that flourishes briefly here during this 12,000 year window of warmth and then are gone. How do I know the exact opposite is true of almost every single common assumption about the world? You might mistake me for a native as well.
I guess it's more important to you to classify anyone who disagrees as defective somehow. In the next breath you will say it's only science. But the science doesn't agree with you. It says redheads are honestly superhuman.
They may be better. I don't know. But regardless, better isn't more beautiful.
A brick is less fragile than a Venetian glass. But it is not more beautiful because of that.
You have it precisely backwards. The cherry blossoms are all the more beautiful for their transience, not less.
There is nothing intrinsically defective about lower social rank. It has nothing to do with disagreeing with me. I simply observe what is and reality will reliably support my observations.
I know absolutely nothing about Pearl, but I predict that If you look at whomever she has been dating, they will not be handsome, high-status men. She can't attract them.
I didn't see Charlton Heston pulling top quality chimp girls in PLANET OF THE APES. They didn't place much value on him. He also had different standards just as I do. My priority seems to be mate and offspring survival. And better genes. If you'll look around you'll see mankind appears to have different criteria now and it has resulted in an average IQ of 94 with enough disease and disability that the whole business of reproduction becomes moot, doesn't it? If you are survived by children who look like gibbons where is the benefit?
Too much high school in these modern standards, same as any third world country. Men are not life support systems for a pair of testicles. Everything else ends with the BBL circus.
Excuse me sir, your Wall of Text and Secret Crown are showing.
I have not learned the secret language yet but I am assuming these are bad things.
You're sounding an awful lot like a Gamma.
Is this scientology or rastafarianism? Please send me a flyer with some prices for E-Meters, I have to get them all if I want to get better.
That tracks well. I'll keep that in mind.
Inside the hierarchy, it can be difficult at times to draw a line between objective and subjective ratings when personalities are involved. Looking forward to your future posts!