Physiognomy of Love

Is it really ethically acceptable to be attracted to certain visual features of persons whether anatomical or otherwise and why do we need a strictly scientific physiognomy of attraction? Conscientious, aware feminists typically sometimes feel bad about judging others by exterior appearance and so we need ask whether, why and specifically how such specialized attraction is a problem indeed.


Attraction to certain features of some kind whether visual, cognitive, motorical, behavioral, anatomical or social is in and of itself unproblematic, yet problems do arise when this becomes intertwined with shibboleths of structural oppression/discrimination such as age, color ethnicity, functionality, gender, sexuality, taxon (race/species) etc.

We need a rigorous science of physiognomy in order to become more able to not only in greater detail understand the workings of physionomistic oppression, but also so as undo it by means of innovative ethico-political social construction indeed.

When we personally express that we are actually or purportedly attracted to shibboleths of discrimination/oppression and physionomistic categories are these obviously highly problematic statements to say the least as these more or less constitute eroticization of structural oppression/discrimination.

We need first understand that these are typically relative tendencies in attraction and social preferences rather than taxonomically exclusive positions. Second should we not feel bad about our emotions but rather learn to understand why certain stimuli trigger certain neuropsychological reactions and how this is the result of individualized collective social constructions in structural social conditioning.

This obviously needs be understood in terms of interdisciplinary intersectionality in understanding how genetics and biology generally are subjected to environmental social construction by means of structural social conditioning. That certainly includes embodied shibboleths of structural oppression/discrimination such as age, color, ethnicity, functionality, gender, kinship and sexuality.

If we don’t even attempt to understand the underlying hermeneutics of prejudicial physiognomy in physionomism; then surely does it become much more difficult to disentangle and undo something which we then truly does not understand. What is at work is a certain Para-Christian “metaphysical” valuing of “the soul” over “the body” as well as an apophatic epistemology accordingly to which we ought no endeavor to investigate or even understand certain issues. While biological determinism is clearly a terrible menace is social determinism even worse a menace. Why really should feminism value non-exact social sciences over far more exact natural sciences? Ought we not rather endeavor to end varying social biases of shibboleths of oppression/discrimination everywhere, including ending gender-based epistemological privileges generally?

We also need develop a psychometric physiognomy of attraction whereby we can measure actual tendencies in attraction in distinguishing those from structural social preferences of individual persons. This should form an important part of online computerized psychometric mass matching for social, sexual, marital, professional and other purposes.

We need ethico-aesthetically embrace our individual panoplies in tendencies in diversity of physiognomy of attraction while learning to disentangle those from structural oppression/discrimination. We need liberate ourselves by the ethico-aestetics of feminist ritual sex, polymorphous sociofluity, intersectional Social Behavioral Training (SBT) and other ethico-aesthetically transformative extended feminist semiotic practices.

While it is no doubt legitimate to complain about physionomistic oppression and other structural oppression is this rather insufficient as that certainly limit’s the advocates credibility. Part of the problem is no doubt the lack of scientific data and hence the essential need for intersectional biology as devoted to studying the role of biology in the social evolution of shibboleths of discrimination/oppression.

When we encounter fellow human beings do we glean much information from the semiotics of their exterior appearance; some of those interpretations are correct while others certainly are not. The problem arrives when this hermeneutics of the body is derived from collectivizing thought rather than from seeking to understand the exterior as expression of idiosyncratic personhood. This is of course not to imply that misunderstandings cannot be individualized as they certainly often are but rather that structural oppression/discrimination is based on structural; (i.e. collective) misunderstanding in prejudicially reducing the unique idiosyncrasy of personhood to physionomistic categories of shibboleths of discrimination/oppression.

Not only do we need an intersectional physiognomy that will help us ethico-aesthetically reconstruct the respective connections between bodies and social categories but we also need develop an applied physiognomy where human beings will be educated in accurately interpreting the personal expressions of fellow persons. There is no doubt that education and training will be highly helpful in this respect and especially in helping undo structural misunderstandings, often known as prejudice.

Attractivity, beauty, cuteness, hotness, sexiness, sensuality, handsomeness etc. are all about ethico-aesthetically expressing the interior by means of the exterior. Love in turn is about appreciating such personal expression in others, meaning recognizing interior and exterior as an integrated experience and thus highly and respectfully so appreciating the respective idiosyncratic personhood as the complete combination of interior and exterior.

In order to profoundly appreciate the respective personhoods of others and thus lovingly fully appreciate as many fellow persons as possible need we thus learn to far better and far more accurately hermeneutically read the interior in the exterior. In this regard is it obviously essential to disentangle physionomistic prejudice as in traditional pseudo-scientific physiognomy from quite essential accuracy in the hermeneutics of the semiotics of the body.

The Eurolect – Politics of the Para-Christian documentation project

Screenshot 2017-12-01 at 23.30.32

The Intelligence Entrapment Methods documentation project.