This explains so much

[Herr Abubu]

https://puu.sh/tLtv5/ab626b9d96.png

[Harkonnen]

That is because high-T masculine men do not actively seek quarrels, especially with women who are not a threat to their status. Small digit men however act very aggressive when they're position is attacked by some low-T faggot fex.

Low-T men are basically bitches so is no surprise they bitch with the bitches (it's the estrogen fumes)

[cosmoo]

I don't believe in this "digit ratio" thingy...
Anyways, Negros have lowest digit ratio, while Neanderthals had almost exclusively longer index finger. So in light of present evidence: low ratio = Neanderthal DNA deficiency.

[Harkonnen]

I don't believe in this "digit ratio" thingy...
Anyways, Negros have lowest digit ratio, while Neanderthals had almost exclusively longer index finger. So in light of present evidence: low ratio = Neanderthal DNA deficiency.

Negros have also biggy dingdongs: this correlation obviously proves that digit ratio is the Real McCoy.

[cosmoo]

Negros have also biggy dingdongs: this correlation obviously proves that digit ratio is the Real McCoy.
If this "digit ratio" theory is indeed true, then low digit ratio is also pretty much correlated with low cranial capacity and a plethora of other not so positive traits.

[Herr Abubu]

I don't believe in this "digit ratio" thingy...
Anyways, Negros have lowest digit ratio, while Neanderthals had almost exclusively longer index finger. So in light of present evidence: low ratio = Neanderthal DNA deficiency.

Do they? From what I read, Chinese, blacks and Balkaners seem to have the lowest digit ratios.

[Harkonnen]

If this "digit ratio" theory is indeed true, then low digit ratio is also pretty much correlated with low cranial capacity and a plethora of other not so positive traits.

Correlation is not always causation.

In the biggydingdong it obviously is. In low cranial capacity likely not.

[cosmoo]

Do they? From what I read, Chinese, blacks and Balkaners seem to have the lowest digit ratios.
Nope. From what I've read East Asians have highest ratio, and many Balkaners also do (Bulgarians have highest in Europe IIRC, data on other Balkan countries was scarce). Negros have consistently low ratio.
Percentage of Neanderthal DNA is most likely strongly correlated with high digit ratio.

Correlation is not always causation.

In the biggydingdong it obviously is. In low cranial capacity likely not.
Read what I wrote above. It is pretty much obvious that peoples with higher cranial capacity and bodymass (East Asians, most of Europeans) have higher ratio than those with low ones (Negros).

[Herr Abubu]

Nope. From what I've read East Asians have highest ratio, and many Balkaners also do (Bulgarians have highest in Europe IIRC, data on other Balkan countries was scarce). Negros have consistently low ratio.
Percentage of Neanderthal DNA is most likely strongly correlated with high digit ratio.

Asians except for the Chinese have high ratios. Maybe it's only Chinese among East Asians, or maybe Asian refers to other Asians, not East Asians.

"It should be noted, however, that the standard deviations associated with each given 2D:4D mean are considerable. For example, the ratio for Han children (0.954±−0.032) allows for a ratio as low as 0.922, while the ratio for Jamaican children (0.935±0.035) allows for a ratio as high as 0.970. Thus some ethnic group's confidence interval overlaps. A 2008 study by Lu et al. found that the mean values of 2D:4D of the Hui and the Han in Ningxia were lower than those in European countries like Britain.[46] In 2007 Manning et al. also found that mean 2D:4D varied across ethnic groups with higher ratios for Whites, Non-Chinese Asians, and Mid-Easterners and lower ratios in Chinese and Black samples.[47]"

From the Europeans tested, Greeks have the lowest digit ratio. 0.92, iirc, which is a very low average. I haven't seen Albanians studied, but I'd assume we have very low, too. It is environmental to a great extent, by the way. Foods, household products, etc., affect the levels of testosterone in the womb.

Either way, a high digit ratio in a man implies subhumanity. Negroes, who don't really have higher DR, would be superior to Eurocucks and East Asian cucks. They are superior to the Danes, though, who have an 1.02 average. The Danes should be genocided.

[cosmoo]

Either way, a high digit ratio in a man implies subhumanity. Negroes, who don't really have higher DR, would be superior to Eurocucks and East Asian cucks. They are superior to the Danes, though, who have an 1.02 average. The Danes should be genocided.
Nope, a low digit ratio (IF the theory is true) implies microcephaly (via lack of Neanderthal DNA) and faggotry (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11053694, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12573297, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15694118).

BTW there have been studies claiming Neanderthals also had low digit ratio, but they erroneously used hand of Qafzeh 9 (modern hominid).

Modern human hand on left, Neanderthal on right (note that last fingerbone on index finger is missing):
http://www.abroadintheyard.com/wp-content/uploads/8a-Modern-human-hand-left-Neanderhal-hand-right.jpg
https://iphesnews.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/ma-neandertal-p.jpg
http://www.ecotao.com/holism/neanderthal_hand.jpg
https://boneclones.com/images/store-product/product-1978-main-main-big-1460580972.jpg

[Herr Abubu]

Nope, a low digit ratio (IF the theory is true) implies microcephaly (via lack of Neanderthal DNA) and faggotry (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11053694, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12573297, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15694118).

One, you would have to measure skulls today to see whether this is true or not. I have an extremely low digit ratio at 0.87-0.89 depending on which hand I measure, but my skull is larger than the Scandinavian average by a fair amount. Not to mention that feminization makes skulls smaller, which means a low digit ratio isn't likely to give microcephaly. In fact I am larger than the average Scandinavian in every way possible.

Two, lesbians tend to have lower digit ratios while faggots tend to have higher digit ratios. Low digit ratio is a masculine-dimorphic trait showing the amount of prenatal testosterone, don't forget.

[cosmoo]

One, you would have to measure skulls today to see whether this is true or not. I have an extremely low digit ratio at 0.87-0.89 depending on which hand I measure, but my skull is larger than the Scandinavian average by a fair amount. Not to mention that feminization makes skulls smaller, which means a low digit ratio isn't likely to give microcephaly. In fact I am larger than the average Scandinavian in every way possible.
Individual case =/= larger population averages.
I'm not saying low digit ratio directly causes decrease in cranial volume in individuals, but that peoples with lower digit ratios on average also tend to have smaller heads on average.
Danes (who have 1.02 average as you said) have quite large skulls:
http://theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe-map7a.jpg

Besides, I don't think you could call Neanderthals (who almost exclusively had longer index fingers) "feminized" or "small-skulled". They were polar opposite of that.


Two, lesbians tend to have lower digit ratios while faggots tend to have higher digit ratios. Low digit ratio is a masculine-dimorphic trait showing the amount of prenatal testosterone, don't forget.
Studies which I posted in previous post suggest contrary.

[Harkonnen]

Read what I wrote above. It is pretty much obvious that peoples with higher cranial capacity and bodymass (East Asians, most of Europeans) have higher ratio than those with low ones (Negros).

Then why do women who tend to have higher ratio have lower body mass and smaller cranium.

Finnish males have lower ratio than Negroes. Finnish women though have higher ratio than Black females:

https://heartiste.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/2d-4d-ethnic.gif

P=Poland
S=Spain
E=English
EH=Ethnic Hungarians
GH=Gypsy Hungarians
G=Germans
Z=Zulus
J=Jamaican
F=Finns

[Harkonnen]

From the study I posted the pic:


The 2D:4D ratio is negatively related to testosterone and to sperm numbers (Manning et al., 1998). Our Finnish sample had very low male 2D:4D, and it is known that Finnish men have sperm counts that are nearly double that of men worldwide (Suominen and Vierula, 1993; Vierula et al., 1996).

[Charles Bronson]

My DR is 0.89 I'm now a Balkanese?

[Herr Abubu]

Individual case =/= larger population averages.
I'm not saying low digit ratio directly causes decrease in cranial volume in individuals, but that peoples with lower digit ratios on average also tend to have smaller heads on average.
Danes (who have 1.02 average as you said) have quite large skulls:
http://theapricity.com/snpa/bilder/troe-map7a.jpg

Besides, I don't think you could call Neanderthals (who almost exclusively had longer index fingers) "feminized" or "small-skulled". They were polar opposite of that.

If it isn't causal there's no point talking about it. One has to wonder why a more masculine-dimorphic person would have a smaller skull. Either way, being masculine is preferable to having a large skull.

Studies from that far back are rarely relevant today. And the reason Danes have high digit ratios is environmental mostly, but it still makes them complete and utter subhumans who shouldn't be allowed to breed.


Studies which I posted in previous post suggest contrary.

You will always have several studies that show the opposite things. There are studies that say the opposite, too. What we do know is that faggotry has something to do with effeminacy. Low digit ratio is masculine-dimorphic and not likely to produce faggotry.

[Herr Abubu]

From the study I posted the pic:

Then it's settled. Finns are the kings of the north. I'll exterminate the Scandinavians so Finns can repopulate the north with MEN. How about it?

[Amud]

My digit ratio is >1 which has always made me doubt the idea of people with high ratios being fags.

[Herr Abubu]

My digit ratio is >1 which has always made me doubt the idea of people with high ratios being fags.

Of course, because faggotry isn't biologically determined, at most only biologically predispositioned. A high digit ratio is feminizing and as such means you have a higher biological predisposition towards faggotry. But then again, digit ratio doesn't even perfectly correlate with prenatal testosterone, so... and one may have low prenatal testosterone, but have a lot of testosterone in later development phases. It's very complex.

[Drawing-slim]

lool

[Harkonnen]

My digit ratio is >1 which has always made me doubt the idea of people with high ratios being fags.

Do you mean homosexuality? Homosexuality has very little to do with 2d4d. It is fringe phenomena in either extremes, if anything homosexuality has been shown to have some correlation with low digit ratio. Digit ratio has more to do with domination, agressivity/submissiveness etc. There are many heterosexual who are sexually submissive.

If you have high ratio I'm going to guess you are bad at sports/don't like it.

[Amud]

Do you mean homosexuality? Homosexuality has very little to do with 2d4d. It is fringe phenomena in either extremes, if anything homosexuality has been shown to have some correlation with low digit ratio. Digit ratio has more to do with domination, agressivity/submissiveness etc. There are many heterosexual who are sexually submissive.

If you have high ratio I'm going to guess you are bad at sports/don't like it.

I was using "fag" in a figurative sense, not actually referring to homosexuality. I think Abubu understands what I meant by it but maybe I should have clarified.

[Harkonnen]

I was using "fag" in a figurative sense, not actually referring to homosexuality. I think Abubu understands what I meant by it but maybe I should have clarified.

For example Christiano Ronaldo and David Beckham are "fags", but I'd bet that they have low ratio.