The person in the picture is u/spez (fastest and the goofiest picture I could find).
Also, please don’t take it seriously. It’s a shitpost. Thanks.
The person in the picture is u/spez (fastest and the goofiest picture I could find).
Also, please don’t take it seriously. It’s a shitpost. Thanks.
It is not a serious opinion, but if I’m going to defend it the first thing I’ll say is that it’s meant to be the inverse of physiognomy.
Physiognomy does not discriminate between cause and effect, it refers only to moral judgements based on physical characteristics. Even the “positive” option embraces the thought.
I will say once more in clearer terms, I do not sincerely believe in this idea - in any form. You seem to want there to be a serious discussion here but this is a shitposting community and after this clarification I will resume acting accordingly.
So you don’t believe in the idea in this non-serious sub, but also won’t admit you were wrong about the basic definition?
Btw, the reason Dahl believed in physiognomy:
https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/roald-dahl-museum-gbr-scli-intl/index.html
I am wrong, you won an internet argument! Congrats, this is the end of your quest.
If it stops you from posting racist and bigoted propaganda again because you vaguely recognize the themes from children’s stories (don’t think about that too much), I do indeed win.
Mad aggro, dude
You don’t even know what that means, that was a wildly polite response to someone posting an anti-Semite’s racist cartoon.
Yes, racist. His “ugly thoughts make you ugly” people have more than a few things in common with anti-semitic caricatures from his day.