Domain Query: The subcontinental RFPF
Commenter buscaraons asked me for my views about how invasions changed, positively or otherwise, the appeal of the women of the Subcontinent:
Short answer: they didn't.
Long answer: they didn't because of three major factors. Read on for the rest.
In my personal opinion - and that is all this is, so take it with a heaping helping of salt if you want - there are three things that explain the low RFPF of Indian women.
The first is historical Indian genetics and the impact of the caste system upon them. The second is the severe gender imbalance in the country. And the third is the nature of the European colonisation of India.
Let us start by taking a look at what the RFPF referred to above is all about.
I was introduced to the concept of the RFPF - Relative Female Pulchritude Factor - by the Excruciator Majoris and Grand Inquisitor of the Evil Legion of Evil, LTC Tom Kratman, a few weeks ago after my last trip to
There is quite a bit of evidence to support this notion.
Some of it dates back to ancient times, such as an old legend concerning a special mission handed to a group of about one hundred young Spartan men during one of their many wars with rival nation-states. I forget exactly who they were fighting, or when, or why - LTC Kratman likely knows the details much better than I do - but the legend goes something like this:
The main Spartan king of the time grew concerned at the fact that his city was not producing enough young men to join the ranks of Spartiates, full-fledged citizen-soldiers who made up the main body of the most feared and respected fighting force in all of Greece. Because of the fact that every male Spartan citizen was basically a full-time soldier, they tended to die out a lot faster than they were replaced. Spartiates became an increasingly rare commodity over the twelve centuries (roughly speaking) of the existence of the Spartan republic - which was a major factor in Sparta's much later defeat at the Battle of Leuctra at the hands of a gay Theban named Epaminondas.
So he gave orders for one hundred of the best [deleted] soldiers in the whole of the [expurgated] army to leave camp and return to Sparta - where they would select the most beautiful and fertile young Spartan virgin girls and bed them. His express intention was to create a new generation of soldiers and citizens to carry the legacy of his city forward through time.
Needless to say, the enthusiasm among the chosen men for this special and most sacred mission was extremely high. And, being Spartans, the men in question made damned sure that the mission was performed exactly as ordered, right down to the letter.
Twenty years later, the Spartan army had plenty more spear fodder, and Sparta itself had plenty more young girls - who, because they were encouraged to exercise and given freedoms way beyond anything that other Greek women enjoyed, were considered the most beautiful in all of Greece.
The modern evidence for the RFPF is abundant. All any man has to do is go to Eastern Europe, where men are thin on the ground but women are not. Russia is a nation of about 147 million people - but women outnumber men there by 9 million or more. It is not uncommon to see Russian men on the streets of Moscow or St. Petersburg dressed rather sloppily and informally - with absolute dime pieces on their arms, the kinds of women who rob you of the ability to think, speak, and move.
While I am sure you wonder what the point of all this is, I bring it up because it is, in fact, directly relevant to answering my reader's question.
Here is the problem with India: attractive women are NOT common. The RFPF in the subcontinent is quite low.
I have written about this a number of times. One of my most heavily viewed and commented pieces, in not-quite-six-years of writing, basically said that the best-looking "Indian" girls often are not even here in India, and that most Indian girls are in fact not attractive, at all.
The years that have gone by since I wrote that piece have only confirmed my opinion.
One could spend a month in Calcutta and encounter all of five even halfway attractive women - by which I mean that you could actually consider taking one on a date, never mind to bed. By contrast, thirty minutes on the streets of Sofia, or Zagreb, or Moscow, would reveal dozens of girls that rank a 7 or above with whom any red-blooded man would happily engage in... uh... intimate relations.
This anecdotal suggests that the influence of European genetics upon the Indian population in general has been extremely limited.
As far as I can tell, the empirical observation is backed up by archaeogenetic evidence. I am hardly an expert in this subject (obviously), but it appears as though the ancient genetic composition of most Indian bloodlines is roughly 60% African and 40% Eurasian. There is also evidence to suggest that the ancestors of modern Indians came from Africa after the Toba catastrophe.
There were definitely Eurasian invasions of India all the way up to about 2,000 BC. I recall seeing speculation that India's most famous work of epic poetry, The Mahabharat, was essentially a romanticised re-telling of the results of a massive Aryan invasion into the existing Dravidian kingdoms of India, dating back to very roughly 1,500 BC - though this is a subject of much academic debate and is certainly not conclusive.
But that was many thousands of years ago, and Indian genetics and bloodlines have fragmented since then at a rate pretty much unheard of in either Europe or Africa.
The reason for this has to do with the peculiarities of the Hindu caste system, which stratifies society into at least four different distinct groupings of people.
Not exactly coincidentally, those groupings did, at some level, coincide with skin colour. The lightest-skinned Indians were typically of the Brahmin, or educated, caste, while the darkest-skinned ones were (and are) of the Dalit, or Untouchable, caste. Social mingling between castes, and eventually even between subcastes of the same overall group, was looked upon with utter horror and revulsion.
(Yes, it is a ridiculous system for the present day. It actually made sense, though, in a feudal environment, which is why just about every feudal nation had a caste system at one point or another. When a nation's primary source of wealth is fertile land, a caste system is an economically efficient way of managing that wealth. These days, however, in a modern economy driven by industry and technology, a caste system is profoundly stupid. It is not a coincidence that nations and cultures which maintained beliefs in caste systems and rigid hierarchies lagged behind in development and growth, while nations and cultures that believed that all men are equal when being judged before God - Jewish and Christian ones, basically - leaped ahead.)
So that ancient history helps explain why the RFPF in Indian is relatively low. But that is all it is - ancient history. What about the modern day?
Well, here we have the very messed-up nature of Hindu culture's views about women to blame.
In a feudal system - which is the kind of world for which Hinduism is designed and makes some kind of sense - sons are more valuable than daughters at the micro level of the individual family. Sons are there to do the hard work in the fields and support the parents in their old age. They are economic producing and consuming animals.
Daughters, by contrast, are considered to be a net burden. When Indian daughters get married, even today, it is traditional for the parents to pay the groom's family a dowry - essentially, a big transfer of money takes place between the fathers of the two kids getting hitched. In places where this view is taken to extremes - and they do exist in modern India - girls are not considered worth very much and it is common in those places for wives to be treated abominably - to the point where the country has had to pass laws to prosecute men for killing their own wives. (Yes, really.)
This, along with the prevalence of sex-selective abortion in the subcontinent, has led to a massive and growing gender gap - the real kind, not the one that terminally stupid liberal Western feminists (Lord, forgive me my redundancies) keep screeching about. I have seen estimates ranging from 30 to 63 to as many as 100 million "missing women" in India's population. And that's just India - never mind Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Sri Lanka.
This second factor explains a lot of the low RFPF of Indian women:
There are so many more men than women in India, particularly in the northern and western states, that the women don't really have to put in much effort.
You see this in the daily reality of walking around in India. Even in the high-end shopping malls of Calcutta or Bombay or New Delhi, the women simply are not attractive. There are a few, to be sure - but not nearly as many as you would expect from a country with 1.2 billion people.
The results of this gender imbalance are about what you would expect, really.
A Westerner coming to India is going to find that gaming the local women is an exercise in psychological warfare. One could counter by arguing that this is true of all women, but I speak from (limited) experience when I tell you that even Ukrainian and Russian drama queens are not this complicated. (Having met a few Eastern European drama queens in my time, that is something of an achievement on the part of Indian girls - and not a positive one.)
When you combine the severe Betatude of the local men, with the sky-high entitlement complex of middle- and upper-class Indian girls, and the results of a starch- and carb-heavy diet where vegetables are turned into a sort of inedible (to me) mush and everything else is stewed out of its mind, you get a skinny-fat population with bad genetics.
And if you try to wife up an Indian woman, if you yourself are not a psychologically strong and stable man with at least some level of natural game, you are going to run into serious problems. Indian women can, and do, make great wives and mothers - but their poor genetics and bad diets make them very prone to ballooning up after they get married.
The worst of all possible worlds involves dating and marrying an Indian woman with Western ideas about careerism and delaying - or, worse yet, completely ignoring - the call of motherhood. I've seen it happen personally, and the results are dreadful. This is about as sensible as stepping into a filled bathtub while carrying a live Taser aimed directly at your balls.
So after much meandering, we have dealt with the first two reasons why the RFPF in India is low: limited genetic mixing in the past, and a queerer-than-a-three-dollar-bill sex ratio in the present.
What about the third - modern European invasions of India?
Well, that's easy enough to figure out.
When the Brits colonised India, they did so with roughly 100,000 civil servants, soldiers, generals, diplomats, and administrators - and ruled over a continent of 300 MILLION pagans and Muslims. And they did so for only about 300 years - give or take.
And, as a general rule, they stuck to their own kind. Miscegenation was always considered disgusting and unnatural by the Brits, and after the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 laws were passed against it.
The same is true of the Portuguese, who got to India much earlier thanks to Vasco da Gama. Goa, which is about an hour's flight away from Bombay, has heavy Portuguese influences and there are a number of beautiful old churches there that stand to this day - but the impact of Portuguese genetics is very limited.
Given the numbers, mathematics are straightforward: the presence of European DNA, traced back to the British and French and Portuguese, is therefore quite small.
It is estimated that there are less than 150,000 Anglo-Indians present in India today - based on the various definitions of "Anglo-Indian". That, in a nation of 1.2 billion, is way too small to make much of an impact.
It is to be noted parenthetically that the Anglo-Indian community enjoys a level of success in professional and cultural fields that is out of all proportion to their relative size - a bit like (((another ethnic group))) that we all know of. And it is for the same reasons: a strong sense of community, a deep appreciation for their shared culture, their perpetual status as outsiders, and most importantly in my view, their very clear monotheistic ethics. Many cultural icons of the West are actually Anglo-Indian - Sir Cliff Richard, Sir Ben Kingsley, Peter Sarstedt, and several other luminaries all are at some level.
So... with all of that said, let's have a little fun with this idea.
What would happen if you combined the best of India with the best of the West - culturally and genetically?
Well... You see that picture of the lady up top in the sari? The absolute stunner who made your jaw drop the moment you saw her?
That is a lady known by the name of "Neha Dalvi", who was supposedly a serious contender for Miss India 2010.
Just one problem: she ain't Indian and she was never a Miss India contestant.
Her actual name is Maria Sokolovski, and as far as I can tell she is either Russian or Italian by birth but lives in London now. (I suspect that "Sokolovski" is not her real name either - if she is Russian, it should be "Sokolovskaya" and she should have a patronymic somewhere.) She was hired by the Indian fashion design firm Seasons to promote their clothes, and boy howdy did she do a bang-up job of it.
Damn if she doesn't look amazing in those outfits - better than pretty much any Indian woman short of maybe Aishwarya Rai in her heyday.
Can you imagine what kinds of women the subcontinent might have produced with a bit more genetic mixing of that kind? Well, you don't have to, because now you can see it for yourself.
With that, I presume that I have answered buscaraons's question to the very best of my ability, and I hope you, dear reader, have been enlightened with some interesting knowledge in the process.
And now I'm going to leave off with a bunch more pictures of Ms. Sokolowski, because... well, if you aren't gay you've figured it out already.
I am seriously wondering why I do not charge fees for people to read my writing. Given that I am lifting the morale of red-blooded men everywhere through my efforts, surely I am doing God's work, eh?