Face Nappies and Fake Science

What might sound like a Monty Python sketch had become a published university study, complete with participants, ratings, comparisons, and the clinical soulless language of scientific observation.

During the covid years, I wrote regularly for The Light Paper UK, contributing more than 75 articles on the absurdity, fear, and confusion of that period. I am now starting a short series looking back at some of the strangest pieces I covered during those dark, soulless years. The aim is to remind readers just how bizarre and nefarious those years were, and how much of what was accepted by a compliant public at the time now looks so deeply wrong and evil.

Looking back, the whole mask shitshow summed up the lunacy and absurdity of those years. Indoctrinated researchers at Cardiff University measured whether a blue surgical mask across a man’s face could make him appear more attractive. What might sound like a Monty Python sketch had become a published university study, complete with participants, ratings, comparisons, and the clinical soulless language of scientific observation.

The study, published in Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, asked 43 female participants to judge the attractiveness of 40 male faces under a set of conditions that, in hindsight, felt absurdly staged. The men were shown without masks, with blue medical masks, with cloth masks, and, most bizarrely of all, holding a plain book over the part of the face where a mask would normally sit—as though human attraction could be reduced to a laboratory version of peekaboo.

Dr Michael Lewis and his co-author from Cardiff University’s School of Psychology explained that earlier research had suggested medical masks made people less attractive, and that they wanted to see whether this concept had changed once face coverings had become unavoidable. The image of so-called academics carefully comparing mask types for their effect on sex appeal showed how compromised the university system is in pushing the current regimes’ narratives.

The mask or nappy face cloth, a symbol of anxious queues and faces, fogged glasses, muffled conversations, and sanitised hands, to be even considered attractive by “academics” is mental. The mask symbolised subservience and cowardice. One could imagine mask manufacturers enjoying and laughing at the unlikely free publicity of this ludicrous study, while everyone else looked back and wondered how society had reached the point where romance and soulless face masks had become part of the same conversation.

The mask years were deeply wrong and demonic. There was something dark and degrading about watching healthy people forced to cover their faces as they went about their day. It was not just public health advice; it was a form of insidious psychological pressure, and the mask became a visible sign of fear, obedience, and submission. Once people accepted masks in large numbers, it became clear how easily the public could be pushed towards the next demand, including the experimental vaccines. People were made to feel guilty for showing their faces, including myself.

Don’t get me started on seeing children wearing masks as parents watched on. Kids with masks were the ultimate demonic sight and still give me shivers when I reflect back.

More than anything, masks dehumanised people!