Ethnic Theory of Attraction

From Incel Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is a extrapolation of the Racepill by data correlations.

Ethnicity and Attraction[edit | edit source]

According to OkCupid[1][2] (a long-term dating site) there are some basic observations to be made:

  1. Black Females are universally unwanted and the most desperate. Inversely, Middle Eastern, Pacific Islander and Asian females are most wanted
  2. White Males are universally desired (see JBW theory) with slightly weaker effect for Middle Eastern, Native American and Pacific Islanders. Inversely, Indian and Black males are the least wanted

This is reflected in Facebook AYI[3] as well.

Applying the Lewis Model, one can draw two axis, one from Linear-Active to India (male desirability), and another axis perpendicular to it (female desirability). Linear-Active ethnicities are more likely to be masculine, Reactive ethnicities are more likely to be feminine, and Multiactive ethnicities are less likely be attractive.

From this idea:

  • High IQ nations (Nordic nations and Maritime East Asians) would possess both masculine and feminine desirability
  • Asia-Pacific and India would possess only feminine desirability (thus Ricecel and Currycel)
  • Western Europe and Anglosphere Whites would possess only masculine desirability (see JBW theory)
  • Slavic nations and the Global South would possess NO desirability (thus including large sets Ethnicel).

This beings in several issues,

  • There is a lack of distinction between Sociosexual and Short-Term Mating Preference (Shorter Life History), and Long-Term Mating Preference and Parental Effort (Longer Life History) strategies. It can be said that OkCupid is biased towards the latter.
  • There may be a relationship between breast-hip deviation of preference in males, and upper-lower deviation preference in females.

Ethnicity and Culture[edit | edit source]

Queer-Baiting & Religiosity[edit | edit source]

According to Pew[4][5], in general religiosity and income are the major factor in homosexuality acceptance, but the outlier also follows a pattern of the two axes. The male desirability axis is also the axis for general homo-tolerance, whilst the female desirability axis dictates whether it correlates with low religiosity and high income (Reactive-leaning, female desirable) or the inverse (Multiactive-leaning, female undesirable). Kirkegaard's[6] reanalysis of OkCupid discovered that Heterosexual Females and Homosexual Males are the most likely to be religious (possibly slow Life History), and Bisexuals are the most likely to be atheistic (possibly fast Life History).

Also for queer-bait media, those that are more Linear-Active are more likely to be entitled (as a lack of distinction between classes), compared to those that are Reactive, where queerness is associated with wealth (see Yaoi).

Polygyny[edit | edit source]

Rushton's Theory of Ethnic Nepotism[7] states, that certain races with fast Life History are more likely to engage in Polygyny, and there has been many genomic research[8] that can back that up, pointing that it aligns with the female desirability axis, where the Global South are "Chads" with Polygyny (fast Life History) whilst Asians are Monogamous "Dads" (slow Life History), with whites in between.

Personality[edit | edit source]

Using the United States Personality[9] distribution as reference, the Linear-Active axis are higher in Openness and Emotional Stability, and lower in General Stability ("Alpha Factor", Conscientiousness and Agreeableness), and Extraversion. The female desirability axis (on the Reactive end) are higher in Openness but lower in General Stability, Extroversion and Agreeableness.

Ethnicity and Body Types[edit | edit source]

Body Proportions[edit | edit source]

As VividMap[10] noted, Linear-Active ethnicities are more likely to have bigger breasts, and hip size runs through the female desirability Axis (reactive being smaller hips). Conversely Linear-Active ethnicities are more likely to be taller[11], whilst penis length[12] runs through the female desirability Axis (reactive being smaller). This means that masculinized ethnicities are more likely to be taller and have bigger breasts, whilst more feminized ethnicities are more likely to have shorter penis size and female hip size.

This combining with previous notes would hint that Buttocks (by extension Lordosis) is antithetical on male long-term dating preference, that breast size is irrelevant to men in the long term, and that females do not care about penis size, only height in long-term relationships. It is possible that OkCupid is a platform for long term dating (K-selection or Long Life History). r-selected dating platforms (e.g. Tinder) would have different criteria for attraction.

Biases in Body Proportion exists between ethnicities. As PornHub[13] data reflects that those ethnicities that are undesirable in both masculine and feminine traits, and those that are more likely to have bigger hips and smaller breasts, are more likely to desire hips over chest. This can imply that there is a ethnic homophily bias within beauty standards. There is also an implication between female hip size and IQ, that they are diametrically opposite to one another, which explains why the expression "Dummy Thicc"[14][15] can be interpreted literally.

Sporting Propensity[edit | edit source]

Observing Previous Olympic Records[16][17], certain sports are preferred for certain ethnicities. The Linear-Active ethnicities are the most likely to succeed in endurance sports (cycling, rowing, sailing, athletics, equestrian), whilst the female desirability axis divides offensive combative sports (wrestling, fencing, boxing, pentathlon), team "sportsball", and synchronized swimming (Multiactive-leaning), from waffling (badminton, table tennis) defensive tossing (judo, taekwando), distance weaponry (shooting, archery) sports, and gymnastics (Reactive-leaning).

The Lewis Model[edit | edit source]

Lewis Model Illustrated
SEAMaxx and attraction to migrants might be the result of cultural Platonism.

Richard D. Lewis invented the idea of the Lewis Model, that puts the world's cultural norms on a ring like shape[18][19][20][21]. The Table Below is a column-by-column representation on Lewis' scoring system[22] and noted characteristics (with comparison with Hofstede[23]).

Lewis Model Multiactive Linear-Active Reactive
Emoji 🌍 🌎 🌏
Description Relationship, Multiple Goals Platonic, Cartesian Harmony, Solidarity
Data Acquisition Solicits First Hand Info Data From Stats, Research Data and People
Planning Outline Step-wise Axiomatic
Project Planning Cross-influence Compartmentalize Whole Picture
Work cycle Multitasking Linear Schedule Reacts to partners
Department Gets Around All Department Within Department All departments
Work Times Any Hours Fixed Hours Flexible Hours
Flexibility Changes Plans Sticks to Plan Slight Changes
Tracking Interrelation Fixed Agendas Thoughtful
Reflection Roams back and forth Sticks to Agenda Asks for repeats
Completion Human Transactions Action Chains Reacts to partners
Communication Impolite and Emotional Direct Indirect
Tone of Speech Emotional Rational Sympathetic
Confrontation Flexibility Truth Diplomacy
Fact Interpretive (not) Descriptive (is) Prescriptive (ought)
Defining Truth "Pulls strings"/Key Persons Officiality Honest Networking
Communication Spoken Word Written Word Face-to-Face/Action
Social v Professional Interweave Separate Connect
Punctuality Unimportant Very Important Important
Off work talk Gregarious Privacy Good listener
Off work talk Inquisitive Minds Own Business Respectful
Delegation Relations Competent Colleagues Reliable People
Face Favors and Excuses Reluctance Never Lose Face
Auditory Talks for hours Brief on Telephone Summarizes Well
Auditory Talkative Talks half the time Silent and Listens
Interruption Often Rarely Does not
People v Jobs People Oriented Job-oriented Very People-oriented
Patience Impatient Partially Impatient Patient
Body Language Unlimited Limited Subtle
Feelings Displays Feelings Partly Conceals Feelings Conceals Feelings
3D Gospel[24][25] Fear Guilt Shame

3D Gospel[edit | edit source]

Three Major Cultures and their interpretation of morality

The 3D Gospel[24][25] expands on this triangular theory of Ethnic cultures through Fear (Multi-Active), Guilt (Linear Active) and Shame (Reactive) in a row-by-row basis. Further country data can be referenced from[26].

Metaphor Combat Courtroom Community
God Ruler & Creator Lawgiver & Judge Father & Patron
Sin Idolatry Lawbreaking Disloyalty
Christ Conqueror Sacrifice Mediator
Salvation Peace/Freedom Forgiveness


Mission Power Truth Community
Sin Usurpation & Idolatry Transgression & Lawbreaking Disloyalty & Rebellion
Sill Illness Utter vulnerability Total depravity Complete unacceptability
Violation God's power and authority Gods laws and justice God's face and glory
Sinners Cursed Condemned Rejected
Consequences of Sin Domination and bondage Judgment and punishment Disgrace and humiliation
Emotions of Sin Anxiety Regret Unworthiness
The Fell (Gen. 3) Hid in fear Shifted blame Covered nakedness
Cultural Solutions Animism, black magic lustily, confess, restitution Cover, flee, abandon
False Hope Rituals, knowledge Morality, works, merit Identity, connections, name
The OT laws reveals Our idolatry Our moral failure Our defilement/separation
Christ Conqueror & Liberator Substitute & Sacrifice Mediator & Brother
Incarnation Jesus arrives to destroy the works of the devil. Jesus becomes folly human to pay our debt Jesus leaves glory to glorify the Father and us
Jesus' Life Cast out demons, worked miracles, signs & wonders Lived sinless Healed the impure, ate with outcasts, welcomed Gentiles
Jesus' Death Defeats spirits and powers Bears the punishment for our moral transgressions Removes our shame and restores God's face/honor
The Cross Establishes God's power Appeases God's wrath Changes God's evaluation
Atonement Theory Christus Victor Penal Substitution Satisfaction (Anselm)
Jesus' Resurrection Victory over Satan and death Assurance of future salvation Divine honor for the shamed
Salvation Power & Freedom Innocence & Forgiveness Honor & Face
Sphere Unseen world Next world This world
Repentance From idolatry (abandon false powers and magical rituals) From works-righteousness (stop trying to please God with perfection deeds) From boasting (resist using cultural systems to promote your status)
Grace (overcomes) Weakness Wickedness Worthlessness
Forgiveness Removes strongholds Pardons wrongs Reconciles relationships
At God's Right Hand Power and authority Acceptance and intimacy Prestige and status
Reconciliation leads to Creation (nature, spirits) Self (soul, conscience) People (family, community)
Discipleship Submission Obedience Loyalty
Holy Spirit Empowerment for battle Guidance for behavior Communion with Trinity
Ethics Blessings Others Loving Others Honoring Others
Assurance Do I have enough power to overcome dark powers? Am I saved and morally acceptable? Am I a part of the right community?
Missiology Power encounter Truth encounter Community Encounter
Ephesians 6:10-17 2:1-10 2:11-22
Society Animistic Individualistic Collectivistic
Existential Question How can I access the power to control life? How can my sins be forgiven to be assured of heaven? How can I be a part of the community to be respected?
Christian Theology Pentecostal, Charismatic Augustinian, Reformed Undeveloped
Principle Metaphor Combat (military) Courtroom (legal) Community (relational)
Primary Location South (Africa, tribal) West (Europe, N. America) East (Middle East, Asia)
Christian Status Recently Christian Historically Christian Minimally Christian
God Ruler & Deliverer (sovereign, transcendent) Lawgiver & Judge (sinless, perfect, just) Father & Patron (glorious, superior, faithful)
God's Holiness He alone created and stands above all things and beings He alone perfectly keeps the absolute moral standard He alone is infinitely glorious, deserving all reverence
God's Sovereignty Defeats spiritual opposition and rules the world Forgives transgressors and enacts our future salvation Honors lowly mortals and humbles the falsely proud
God's Righteousness Cosmic Power Punitive justice Covenantal Faithfulness

Reference[edit | edit source]

  24. 24.0 24.1
  25. 25.0 25.1