This was originally posted two years ago, but due to popular request, I am relinking it.
Enjoy. Or print out and use as dart board, bird cage liner or whatever. However you are inclined.
This was originally posted two years ago, but due to popular request, I am relinking it.
Enjoy. Or print out and use as dart board, bird cage liner or whatever. However you are inclined.
A commenter writes:
It seems you are trying to force a connection between “South Indians” and Caucasians because many people especially from Kerala have very European features.
Kerala has witnessed a lot of migration from Syria and other places, because of the ancient civilization of peaceful people there who welcomed migrants that were probably ostracized from their previous communities because they adopted certain beliefs and practices that were exported by Dravidian spiritualists.
Whatever the reason for their migration, it is known that the western part of South India has seen a lot of migration of Caucasians since antiquity. But purebred Dravidians have no Caucasian connection except that they are a most ancient race closely linked with Negrito/Aboriginal peoples, therefore many of the races that were birthed later naturally carry that connection.
The branch gives birth to the fruit but the fruit doesn’t have much of the branch in it, if you know what I mean.
Tamils, who are often considered to be synonymous with the term “South Indians” have little or no Caucasian in them (in terms of later mixing through Caucasian/Aryan migration), likewise most Keralites have little or no Caucasian in them, except for those families who at some point mixed with Caucasian merchants or explorers that journeyed to South India for its spices and various other specialties.
The pictures you see of South Indian women with European-looking features are usually of models or actresses – those who are in professions where fair skin and European features are preferred whether due to bias or its more global appeal. But if you actually visit South India you will see how little resemblance there is to Caucasians and how much greater is their similarity to Negrito/Aboriginal people.
Yet, you resist the strongly evidenced connection between South Indians and Negroid peoples, while trying to force a connection between South Indians (Dravidians) and Caucasians. I smell a fish. 🙂
There is overwhelming evidence that out of Africa came the father of all the races, and so you can’t get too far by excluding any race from the African link. Anyway, I believe there is only one race…the human race. At least that we can be certain is not based on speculation but truth. Peace!
The truth is that even South Indians are part of the Caucasian race. This is clear on any genetic chart. Cavalli-Sforza’s charts make it clear that South Indians are Caucasians.
Other charts show Indians are partway between Asians and Caucasians, but closer to Caucasians. This is probably about right.
No genetic chart shows the South Indians as closer to Australoids. The only Australoids on genetic charts are Melanesians, Papuans and Aborigines, and South Indians are nowhere near any of those. Negritos do not appear on genetic charts in general as they tend to group with whomever they live with. Filipino Negritos group with Filipinos; Thai Negritos group with Thais, etc.
It is true that on skulls, Tamils do group with Australoids, but on genes, they are just typical South Indians, more or less Caucasoids. But most South Indians have Caucasoid skulls.
This commenter, an Afrocentrist, makes the typical mistake of conflating Caucasian with White or European. But there are many non-White or non-European Caucasoids out there.
If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.
A male feminist commenter, who has now been banned, writes:
Wait a minute…there are actual people who don’t realize that asking co-workers for sex at work is incredibly inappropriate and grounds for sexual harassment?
This site his HILARIOUS!!!
What happened was that a man asked out a woman at work. He did so privately, but the woman was such an insane cunt that she told all of the women in the office. The women all pretty much hated the guy, but the guys couldn’t really care less about him. The women considered him undesirable – a creep. There was a huge uproar because this guy asked a chick out. Big deal!
The supervisor suggested that it was sexual harassment for any employee to ask out any other employee. There had already been several high profile relationships among the workforce.
First of all, sexual harassment has to do with higher ups demanding sex from those under their employ as a condition of further work. You either sleep with me or a fire you. It was recently expanded to the point where a man is persistently bothering a woman and won’t knock it off. Well, that is maybe sexual harassment, but I doubt it. The woman has to make it clear to the guy that he needs to knock it off. then if he continues, there’s a problem. What sort of a problem, I am not sure. Perhaps he will be fired.
For all intents and purposes, sexual harassment does not exist among co-workers at the same work level.
It is certainly not sexual harassment for a male coworker to ask out a female coworker. It never has been. It’s not even sexual harassment to flirt with coworker.
People are spending more and more time at work, and many coworkers start dating each other. It happens all the time. No one is going to stop it or do anything about it.
This is a clear example of Female Rule. The commenter, who supports Female Rule, feels that all relationships among coworkers should be banned. It should be sexual harassment for any man to ask out any female coworker. If women ran the world according to female rules, this is exactly the sort of law or rule that would be put into place.
You are accusing woman in general of being immoral or amoral in certain ways. You are portraying them as vindictive and opportunistic, using rules to get their own way. You are questioning the moral integrity of woman in general.
This is exactly what I am doing. By the way, Alpha agrees with me on this. And you know who told me, “Man make rules. Women break them.”? My own mother! She knows her own gender very, very well. Now, neither my mother nor Alpha are inclined to use rules as tools like that, but they understand that the basically conniving nature of women means that many will.
There is a good reason why women do this. Men are strong. We are stronger. Rules favor the strong and disfavor the weak. The weaker people will use rules as tools to be used to their advantage however. The stronger will demand that everyone play by the rules.
An example is the rules of war. Strong states like the US and the Zionist entity demand that their opponents play by the rules of war. However, those fighting the US, Israel and any other huge state would get completely creamed if they played by the rules of war.
So guerrillas and any weaker force fighting any stronger force will always bend the rules and break the rules and use guerrilla warfare, deception, sneak attacks, suicide bombings, spies, no uniforms, hiding behind civilians, waving surrender and then dropping their flags and shooting and other pussy bullshit when fighting the stronger force. It’s the only way they have a chance.
Women don’t really stand a chance going one on one against men. That’s why they use subterfuge, spying, conniving, rule-breaking, deception and other “guerrilla war” tactics when fighting men and others in general .
Guerrilla war and deceptive, non-rules based war are essentially feminine warfare tactics. The US and Israel demanding that everyone fight fair and square is a masculine mode of warfare. The way women see it, demanding that they fight fair and square is bullshit. Men are stronger, so men will always win.
I think the mama’s boy thing is a bit of a non-issue to men. Most men are perfectly comfortable with loving their mum.
The only girls to ever tease me in that way were Mauritian Hindu girls. It did annoy me. Not because I was ashamed of being close to my mum but because they were dissing my masculinity. At the same time I felt that the implication wasn’t true that being close to your mum detracts from your masculinity. I thought ‘yeah I love my mum, so what?’
Men know deep down that their mum is the one who really loves them unconditionally and it matters to them. Often men’s mums have helped them through a lot too. I remember a tough guy ex drug dealer, who was described to me as an animal when it came to fighting, told me that his dad was a bastard who mistreated him but him mum was his ‘angel’.
You get black thugs and gangsters who are fiercely devoted to their mothers who brought them up alone. Also, Lennox Lewis, the ex heavyweight champion of the world (baddest man on the planet), was always seen with his mum and known to be close to her.
Drop the mama’s boy thing girls. We don’t care. Jealous or something?
I guess its supposed to imply a a little boy who goes crying to his mum or something but we are men and we love our mum. Get over it. It doesn’t mean shit about shit. 😀
The whole “Momma’s boy” thing is a huge issue to girls and women, but it’s basically a non-issue to men and boys. Men and boys don’t really care whether some guy is a “Momma’s boy” or not. It’s not important. What’s more important is the question, “Is he masculine or not?”
Let’s give the example of prison inmates. These are some of the hardest, toughest, baddest guys in the whole country. No argument there. They are off the charts in terms of masculinity. The vast majority of them have “Mom” tattooed somewhere on their bodies. They all love their Mommas. The vast majority of them also hate their fathers. Clearly loving your mother and hating your father doesn’t turn you gay!
However, the extent that hating your father is a problem, many criminals and antisocial types do indeed hate their fathers. Gay men don’t have a great relationship with them either because the son’s effeminate behavior probably bothered the father. Many to most of my friends hated their fathers. Not one of them was gay. A recent survey should that 37% of all men dislike their fathers.
A much more serious problem than men loving their mothers is men hating their mothers. I do not like to be pessimistic, but a man who hates is mother is not in a good place psychologically. I believe it is possible to hate your mother and still end up in good shape psychologically. However, many men who hate their mothers also end up hating or disliking women in general. A very large percentage or rapists and serial killers who target women hate their mothers.
It’s possible for a man to be overly attached to his mother, this is true. Many masculine men who love their mothers don’t necessarily listen to everything they say or obey them. Surely the prisoners above don’t listen to their mothers all that much. Obviously their mothers don’t approve of their behavior, but the men don’t care much whether she approves or not.
Many mothers try to inhibit their sons’ masculinity in various ways. In particular, they dislike it when their sons (especially their young sons) begin having sex. It’s important for boys and men to not listen to their mothers when their mothers try in various ways to stop them from having sex. Most players and womanizers have mothers who disapprove of their behavior. The players love their mothers, but they don’t listen to them when it comes to sex.
The truth is that the vast majority of mothers are going to love you anyway no matter what your sex life is like or how many or how few women you sleep with.
My own mother pretty much told us not to be Momma’s boys. She gave the example of Karl Menninger, who she spitefully called a Momma’s boy. This man, one of the top psychiatrists in the country, called up his mother to ask her whether he and his wife should have a baby. My Mom made it clear that no grown man should be asking his mother’s permission to such a thing.
So really the best mothers should love you unconditionally as the best mothers do but at the same time should discourage men from being a Momma’s boy. Momma’s boys do not reflect well on either the son or the mother.
Yes, I have been called this, especially by women. Why, I don’t know. For a while there, quite a few people thought I was gay. Even women did. Even women I was dating did. Even women who I was having tons of sex with all the time did. Go figure.
I remember this one bitch, I was at her place. I mentioned my mother and she spitefully laughed, “Your mother!” Some asshole guys joined in the cackling. I was actually sleeping with this bitch at the time. I am not sure what she was trying to say, either that I was unmasculine or that I was gay, I don’t know.
Another time I was 20 and had a 16 year old girlfriend. We were having sex all the time, and my Mom didn’t dig it. She said she was too young, and it was illegal. Well, she was right. Nowadays guys doing this get arrested of child molestation charges, get called pedophiles, get sentenced to 10 years in prison and have to register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives. But back then things were saner. I told my teenage girlfriend my mother didn’t approve, and she went ballistic on me.
Females in general are hung up on the Momma’s boy bullshit for psychological reasons. The females you are involved with feel they are competing with the mother for the attention of the man.
In most of the world, this is no big deal as it is considered normal for the son to be very close to the mother (see Mediterranean Europe, Latin America, the Arab World, South Asia, Southeast Asia and Northeast Asia for example).
However, in the West, wives and girlfriends see the mother as a competitor for affection. If they think he listens to her too much or likes her more than he likes them, they get pretty nutty. At that point, the man becomes a “Momma’s boy” which is really an attack on his masculinity. Verbally, your woman is kicking you in the nuts and saying you’re not a man.
Western (Jewish) psychiatry – primarily heavily Jewish psychoanalysis – made a huge deal about “Mommism” and how it supposedly fucked up men. Considering that Jewish guys are about the biggest Momma’s boys on Earth, this obsession is curious and smacks at some sort of denial and projection defense mechanism.
Truth is that in nations like Italy who have whole countries full of millions of Momma’s boys of all ages. Italian men are extremely virile and masculine, and there is little evidence that “Mommism” has had any detrimental effects whatsoever there. Truth is that there is little empirical psychological data that “Mommism” along Italian lines (which is also practiced in much of the world) is harmful to men in any way.
I don’t think men should live with their parents for a long time after they are considerably into adulthood unless they have an excellent reason for doing so. Not that I think there is anything all that wrong with it, but in our society, you are just going to bring a shitload of abuse down on you if you keep living with your parents too long. It’s wrongly seen as “living with your mother” even if your Dad and siblings live there too!
I lived at home while I got my BA because I didn’t have the money to move out, and I was a fulltime student. I got tons of grief the whole time at university for doing this. I did move out for 9 months or so on a student loan, but the money ran out and I had to move back home.
After I graduated, I kept living at home for another 9 months or so until I moved out again. During this time, I endured a mountain of abuse for living at home at age 23 after I had graduated from college. I did move out for 6 weeks during this time for what was only a short-term deal, but then I moved back. Truth be told, I was saving up money to move out after I graduated!
The overwhelming majority of idiots pouring it on me on this issue had not gone to college. They were working class folks who moved out soon after high school. During this period, I got fired from a job for no apparent reason other than the guy just didn’t like me. One of the stated reasons for firing me was that I was still living at home. He was utterly furious about that.
I got a new job a long ways from home that required me to move. I was very coy about my previous arrangements, but the new boss guessed that I had moved from my parental home to my new apartment at age 24. He was extremely disgusted about that and went on and on about how at age 19, he was living on a fucking houseboat in Amsterdam with a girlfriend. Of course, he hadn’t gone to college.
In the interim, I moved back home a couple of times for post graduate education, once to get a teaching credential and another time to get a Masters Degree. If you are living at home past age 23 for any reason, even a post-grad degree, you are really going to get the heat poured on you.
During those periods when I moved home to get post-grad degrees, I met many women. Quite a few of them were stark raving furious that I was living at home, even for a good reason. I still dated a lot, but it was a difficult situation. American women are simply insane on this question.
Even now, though I live 33 miles away from my Mom, I catch grief about that, always from a woman. Apparently I haven’t moved far enough away! She’s still within driving distance. Horrors! Actually, more than one woman has explicitly told me that I live way too close to my Mom and I need to move farther away from her. The implication is that I’m still a Momma’s boy because she’s an hour away by car.
I see her maybe once or twice a week, and I admit that I take my laundry up there to get it done. So I guess I am still a Momma’s boy at my advanced age then.
I think the American fetish with moving out as soon as you hit 18 and moving the maximum number of 1000 miles away from your family and seeing them as rarely as possible is a bit extreme. It’s a Nordic thing based on radical individualism. Most of the rest of the world is much more family oriented for better or for worse.
Nevertheless, as long as society is this nutty about this stuff, I think it’s better for men to move out if they are single. Ultimately it helps you mature more as an individual, and you have much more of a potential for a sex life living away from home. Sometimes you just have to cave in to society’s demands.
Tyler Lee (apparently a Chinese male) writes:
I think it is only applicable to about 10-15% of city dweller Filipinos when suggested that they are related to Southern Chinese. I have been to quite a few places in the Philippines and most Filipinos look like native Malaysians & Indonesians, and their native cultures and languages are almost alike.
The ones that look like Southern Chinese are most likely to be mixed descendants of earlier Chinese immigrants from centuries ago. Another supporting fact is that although they have been a democratic nation for longer than nearly all Asian countries, Philippines is still dirt poor, and Filipino IQ, as a whole nation, is no where near that of Southern Chinese.
However, I do see similarity with Fujianese/ Cantonese and Vietnamese, based on the look, culture and relatively high academic/professional performance among these in the U.S.
Filipinos are very close to Southern Chinese. However, Thais, Lao and Vietnamese are also very close to Southern Chinese.
As far as why Thais, Lao, and Filipinos do not particularly look like Southern Chinese, that is because they are heavily admixed with native SE Asian or native Filipino. In Filipinos, the male line is Ami from Taiwan, but the female line is ancient island SE Asian related to proto-Tai from 10-20,000 YBP. This was basically an Australoid or Melanesian type grouping. The male line via Taiwan aborigine is not related to more recent infusions of Chinese genes in Filipinos over the past ~1000 years.
It is well known that Vietnamese were predominantly Australoid (Melanesian) until ~2,000 YBP. At that time, there was a huge infusion of genes from Southern China (Cantonese region) and they transitioned from Australoid to Mongoloid (SE Asian type). They had already been transitioning this way for ~2,000 years, but the mass infusion of Chinese genes helped them along.
With the Thai and Lao, they are mostly Southern Chinese. A huge infusion of Southern Chinese genes poured in from Yunnan about 900 years ago and admixed with native SE Asian (probably Melanesian/Australoid type). This admixture created the modern Thai or Lao people.
Closely related groups can have dramatically different IQ’s. We can see this by looking at SE Asian IQ’s.
IQ Genetic distance* Group Southern Chinese 105 - Northern Chinese 105 Very far Vietnamese 99.5 Very close Thai 98.5 Close Lao 89 Close Filipinos 86 Close *Genetic distance compared to Southern Chinese. 1. Thai, Lao and Filipinos are about equidistant from Southern Chinese