A long time reader and commenter has clued me in to a series on the Orthodox Blog “Russian Faith” concerning attracting a spouse. The first post in the series is “How to Attract a Christian Spouse-Marriage Advice from a Christian Dad.” The author cites my LAMPS/PSALM model favorably at one point, although he adds on a final S to include Spirituality. I think I will respond to that point sometime later, as it is good to understand what my model is, and what my model isn’t.
He then wrote a follow up post, title Attractiveness: Beauty is Not Just On the Inside. It is very Un-PC in all of the right ways. A snippet from it:
A woman’s physical attractiveness is the most immediate and pressing point of interest to most men. Morally and spiritually, this can be quite dangerous — we all know very attractive women whose spiritual lives are a mess — but attractiveness itself is central to attraction by most men (whether godly or not).
A young lady may be a devout Christian, but if she is not physically attractive, the vast majority of men will pass her over.
This is absolutely true, and something which unfortunately is not taught enough in Christian circles (of any faith tradition). The reverse is of course true for men as well, and is one of the reasons why we have the Christian side of the ‘sphere.
One thing I found very striking about the second post is the photos. They showcase beautiful women who are very feminine and modest in appearance. Not the vulgar “sexiness” the world loves to push out.
I will be curious to see where the author takes the remaining posts. At the same time, I am already pleased to see this kind of article happen. Especially because it showcases my LAMPS/PSALM model and the understanding that goes with it. Hopefully more Christian outlets will take advantage of those kinds of resources in the future.
Donal Graeme 
In all fairness, who’s model could he use other than your’s? I have not seen anyone else construct a theory of what women are attracted to as useful as your’s since you introduced it on SSM’s blog. The only flaw I can see in it is the tendency of women to dial up hypergamy to eleven which it does not address.
Comments:
1. Youth is necessary, but he’s not precise enough. If a woman is “too” young regarding maturity, you may not have enough “years” of data by which to judge her unless she is unusually mature or well raised.
2. Youth is very subject to lifestyle. I know girls who are 25 and have better skin, weight, hair, etc. than 18 yo girls who have been living an unhealthy life. Again, it’s a grey area.
3. One thing forgotten here is “health”. Girls who eat right (meat and veg) forgoing the grains & sugar, plus lift weights (i.e. squat and deadlift especially) build a firm, healthy frame with great skin, hair, and teeth. This is a forgotten piece. It’s really 90% diet.
4. Attitude: women with a good, pleasant demeanor simply age better. You can see it on their face, their mouth, their eyes. Again, women who are 30 can look as young or younger than a 25 yo if they are happy and generous…and the opposite is equally true.
Sorry to nitpick, just stuff I’ve observed over the years. I definitely liked the post and welcome back.
Looks can be deceiving, as someone already wrote, and this focus on it on the “Alt” sphere is very unchristian, for the Bible even rejects it (Proverbs; Leah being the one from whom Christ came, not the more beautiful Rahel etc.)
Further, intelligence is a lot more important, in fact, class is. Apparently, most on the right forget how marriage worked in the past. Fathers decided, too, who is going to marry their daughters, and even men were often unwelcome with some of their choices regarding women. Famous example: Bismarck’s son was threatened with suicide if he married Elisabeth zu Carolath-Beuthen, who was also ten years older than his son.
His son did not marry her, but died in bitternes because of it.
So, this is another reason why the Orthodox clearly aren’t an alternative: just as materialistic as most other Chrisitans. I’d even say that some of the “cucked” Churches are more tolerable than what one finds among “woke” Christians. I certainly have no interest in sitting in the pews and getting lectured for my looks, or that I am not married and so on.
Simply implement eugenics, I’ve written about it myself:
http://archive.is/vMNqr
Chris Langan is anti-dysgenics, too. This way, I would have been spared this horrible life in this horrible world.
Regarding marriage, feminism, incel, MGTWO and so on, I’d rather recommend F. Roger Devlin — also mentioned by Dalrock — or Andy Nowicki. It is better not to marry, as the Bible teaches, and I will gladly be the last one of my crappy “tribe”. This Varus guy even supports mixed race marriages. Completely nutters! Given how unstable they are, and how they are wrecking society, as Vox Day often makes clear.
But then again, we live in one of the most decadent, vulgar ages that ever existed, no wonder then that Christians are horny for “smoking hot” women too. Talking about diet, and demeanor — which is genetic — is just another imbecility. Man, I’m glad when I’m dead, in fact as an atheist I hanged myself at 23 because this world is such crap; now I have to endure it, unfortunately, having been born-again. Like the German poet and Catholic Reinhold Schneider.
In the past, people worked on the fields, forty year olds could look like sixty. Our age is so obscenely vulgar, it’s hard to believe God hasn’t already destroyed this evil (Gal 1:4) and wicked (1 John 5:19) world.
Also, sex is simply the way we are lured in forcing life on some other poor soul, it is the result of the fall, for otherwise, who would take it upon himself to bring someone into this crappy world if sex wouldn’t shut off his ratio and make all the blood rush out from his brain downwards? Because this is what our origins are: disgusting, irrational, born of lust. And the latter part Christ was spared, as Nowicki notes correctly.
The West will be healthy again when the monasteries are crowded again.
As if one choose one’s looks! Ridiculous! Genetic is destiny.