Face Masks Make You More Attractive?

These guys think so.

Beyond the beauty of occlusion: medical masks increase facial attractiveness more than other face coverings
The sanitary-mask effect (Miyazaki and Kawahara in Jpn Psychol Res 58(3):261–272, 2016) is the finding that medical face masks prompt an image of disease and thus result in lower ratings of facial attractiveness of the wearer. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, medical masks have been found to increase attractiveness (Patel et al. in Plast Reconstruct Surg Glob Open 8(8), 2020) although this could have been a general effect of occlusion. To further explore this issue, female participants were presented with a series of male faces of low or high attractiveness that were occluded with a medical mask, cloth mask, book or not occluded and asked to rate them on attractiveness. The results show that faces were considered as most attractive when covered by medical masks and significantly more attractive when occluded with cloth masks than when not occluded.

Maybe if the wearer is so unattractive that hiding the face helps (yeah, that would be me). But I think they found something else.

Finally, participants showed high levels of agreement with the statements “Face masks have become part of everyday life in the past year” (M = 4.62, SD = 0.94) and “The use of face masks is effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19” (M = 4.26, SD = 0.89). This meant that investigating correlations of attractiveness differences with mask-wearing attitudes was not possible.

What they really discovered is that people stupid enough to think masks work and everyone should wear them all the time thinks masks make people more attractive. Well, they’re psych types; naturally they can’t see their own findings.

Chiraq Alderwoman Ask Constituents To Die

A moronic Dim — but I repeat myself, is one-upping the “rape whistle.”

Chicago alderwoman brings back ‘WhistleSTOP’ program to deter crime
Lincoln Park Alderman Michele Smith (D-43) is asking her constituents to buy whistles and blow them if they see certain crimes unfold.

“The idea is to let people know that they’re being watched in the community, and being supported by the community and help take back our streets,” said Smith.

Yes, a stupid idea. But how can you make it even more stupid?

In the bulletin, she writes, “if you find yourself in a suspicious situation or witness a crime, blow your whistle. If you hear a whistle, call the police, then move toward the source while blowing your own whistle.”

Yep. That stupid. Approach an active crime scene. Gangbangers shooting it out over drug turf, or just another episode in Revenge Shooting of the Day? Blow your whistle to call the thugs’ attention to yourself as you go to wattch the excitement.

On the bright side, in Chicago I don’t think many folks are going to take her advice.

Mid-Terms: Time To Change The Message

“The overwhelming number of [COVID-19] deaths, over 75%, occurred in people who had at least four co-morbidities. So really these are people who were unwell to begin with.”
— CDC Director Rochelle Walensky

ChinCOVID panic was a really useful tool for terrorizing Americans in 2020, setting the stage for unaccountable mail-in and dropbox balloting (just made for fraud). But now that the BS is becoming clearer to more people, the pseudo-medical tyranny is loosing the shine. Instead of fear, shutdowns, jobs lost, shelves scantily stocked are just pissing everyone off. That’s never a good thing for the party in power come election time.

Its usefulness fading, it’s time for ChinCOVID to go away. Preferably just in time for the Biden puppeteers to declare that he fixed it, as promised in his basement campaign.

So the message now is:

  • Omicron is hardly more than a cold.
  • Deaths are down; see, the pseudo-vaccines worked!
  • It’s now people who are already “unwell” who are dying, not otherwise healthy people.
  • Problem solved!

While the abrupt change in message will continue to piss off many who saw through the crap to begin with, it will work on much of the Dim-ocRats target demographic: stupid urban parasites. And the Dims need them this year.

The 2020 election fraud was so blatant that many states changed laws to prevent the worst of it repeating. And, sadly to say, there are angry people this close to doing something about a repeat personally, aand the hell with the courts.

So The Dims need to recoup voters; they just can’t risk fraud on the 2020 scale again (any time soon, at least).

Of course, Repugnatcans have a messaging problem, too, which has prompted their own changes. Georgia exemplifies it.

Governor Kemp and Secretary of Scum Raffensperger spent the past 17 months saying the elections were just fine, no fraud here, nothing to see, move along now. Oh, Kemp very briefly promised a real forensic audit. But quite coincidentally did an abrupt 180 immediately after the odd crash that killed his daughter’s boyfriend.

But now it’s 2022, and the Reps have a potentially serious voter turn-out problem (foreshadowed by the 2021 Senate run-offs, when many conservative saaw no point in botheri g when Raffensperger enabled more fraud by unlawfully and unconstitutionally opening up voter registration for the run-offs). So the Rep message had to change.

Whoa! We just found evidence of fraud, and we’ll — at least pretend to — carefully investigate now. So vote for us!

Yeah, no. Raffensperger is the one who agreed to unlawfully allow all those unattended dropboxes, and Kemp is the one who let him do it. (And what happened to the unaccounted-for Zuckerbucks? Who got that?)

So read those messages. Between the lines.

Transgenderism As Eugenics?

Let’s see how many outraged loons I can attract today.

Recently, Peter Grant had a couple of posts regarding “transgender” people and medical care. He noted in that first post:

Even worse, he/she/it is openly asking whether a DNA analysis service is willing to falsify its results for the sake of political correctness. Why would anyone in their right minds want falsified results that might lead to inappropriate medical treatment for a serious illness? Some are sex-dependent. You can’t get (or be treated for) prostate cancer if you don’t have a prostate, or cervical cancer if you don’t have a cervix. What happens when a test on someone who not only identifies as female, but presents a genetic report appearing to confirm that it’s female, produces results suggestive of prostate cancer? One has visions of medical technicians’ minds exploding!

This is something that’s been on my mind. Especially since reading another blog post from another person a few years back. I can no longer find that post; it’s possible it was removed due to tranny shitstorms. So I’ll not attribute it and cause problems for the person. Let the fecal hurricane make landfall on me. The gist of the post was…

This person has known many medical professionals. Based on observations and conversations, this person wondered if the “gender reassignment” surgery specialists were practicing something more along the lines of eugenics than medicine. That is, This obviously disturbed person thinks he is a she. This person should not pass on his genes just in case this mental illness has a genetic basis. I’m going to convince him to undergo estrogen treatment and surgery before he can breed.*

Since that person’s post, I’ve noticed an ever-increasing push to start prepubescent kids on puberty blockers and reassignment. It’s almost as if… Make sure they can’t breed. Catch the defectives before puberty even kicks in making it possible for them to breed.

Now combine that sort of thinking with Peter’s observation that incorrect gender-based medical treatment can cause harm or even lead to death. And that the doctors doing that absolutely must know it. Is this a passive aggressive attempt to get the flawed out of the gene pool even more permanently? Do these folks, deliberately giving “trans” the wrong medical care, think that the good they’re doing for society outweighs the harm done to the mentally ill individual?

If so, are they correct? Personally, I’m more inclined to respect individual rights than those of a nebulous “society.” But I also think individuals are responsible for their own choices. On the trannies own heads be it. But I’m interested in other people’s thoughts on this.

* I’m sorta semi-acquainted with a guy who decided to “transition” to female. He started massive doses of estrogen. And was apparently kinda shocked, kinda disappointed to discover that now he longer had any interest in sex with guys, much less women. Seemingly, no therapist advised him of such a possibility at all. Chemical castration. Considering the freaking checklists of potential problems — informed consent documents — the doctors read to me just for hip replacement, it seems “odd” that no one mentioned the possible impact on sex drive to this confused guy.