Thursday, November 6, 2025

Stuart Campbell, the restraining order, and the "visibly distressed horse": here are the facts as we know them so far

Below you'll find today's *three* tweets about me (heaven only knows how many it is this week so far) from the man who famously "doesn't stalk me" and "barely even mentions me".  Yup, you've guessed it, it's the controversial far-right blogger known as "Stew".  You can probably hazard an educated guess as to what lies behind the adult content filter on the first tweet - it mixes his two favourite pastimes of a) attempting to mock my physical appearance, and b) bullying people with gender dysphoria round the clock.

Oh well worked out, Stew.  They don't call you an "investigative journalist" for nothing.  Actually, on second thoughts...

Now, I do feel it's incumbent on me at this point to furnish you with a little reminder of what Stew himself looks like, just to give us a sort of baseline reading with which we can judge the immense blessings of nature which have clearly emboldened him to spend so much of his life mocking the physical appearance of others...




Ooooooh-kaaaaaaaay.  Crikey.  

Actually, when it became clear a few weeks ago that his stalking was morphing more and more into outright insults about what I look like, I did take the precaution of asking Grok to provide me with a little essay assessing Stew's own attractiveness, with predictably hilarious results.  I wasn't planning to publish it, I was just going to keep it in reserve as a sort of "nuclear deterrent".  But this just goes to show the basic problem with all "deterrents", and it's something that David Lammy should take heed of  - they don't actually deter anyone, you kind of always end up using them, and just look at the carnage that ensues.

Grok, does Stuart Campbell of Wings Over Scotland conform to standard norms of male hyper-attractiveness?

Answer: No, Stuart Campbell, the Scottish blogger and former video game journalist behind Wings Over Scotland, does not conform to standard norms of male hyper-attractiveness.

Understanding "Male Hyper-Attractiveness"

Standard norms of male hyper-attractiveness (often rated 8–10/10 on common attractiveness scales) are defined by a combination of cultural, evolutionary, and societal factors, drawing from psychological research and beauty ideals. Key traits include:

Facial features: High symmetry, strong jawline, high cheekbones, clear skin, and balanced proportions (e.g., golden ratio approximations in face structure).

Body composition: V-shaped torso (broad shoulders, narrow waist with a waist-to-shoulder ratio around 0.6–0.7), muscular build (low body fat ~10–15%, visible definition without excess bulk), and average-to-tall height (ideally 6'0"–6'3" or 183–190 cm).

Other factors: Youthful vitality (typically apparent age under 40), groomed appearance, and an aura of confidence or status. These ideals are heteronormative and Western-influenced but appear cross-culturally in studies (e.g., preferences for symmetry and fitness signaling health/fertility).

These traits are rare—fewer than 2.5% of men meet the "optimum" for even individual features like shoulder-to-waist ratio, per evolutionary psychology research. Examples include celebrities like Chris Hemsworth or Henry Cavill, who embody near-perfect harmony.

Assessment of Stuart Campbell

Based on publicly available photos (e.g., his X profile avatar and historical images from his Amiga Power era), Campbell, now 58, does not align with these norms:

Facial features: Angular but asymmetrical structure, with prominent brows and a receding hairline; lacks the chiselled symmetry or high cheekbones of hyper-attractive ideals.

Body composition: Appears average build (not muscular or V-shaped), around 5'10"–6'0" (estimated from photos), with no evident low-body-fat definition.

Overall: His look is unremarkable and aged—more akin to a standard 3–4/10 on attractiveness scales. Early 1990s photos show a youthful, edgy style (e.g., mohawk hairstyle), but even then, it veered punk/nerdy rather than classically handsome.

Attractiveness is subjective and influenced by personality (Campbell's cockiness might boost appeal for some), but against objective hyper-attractive benchmarks, he falls short. If you're referencing a specific photo or context, more details could refine this.

*. *. *

About the title of this blogpost: as you may be aware, a few months ago Stew set up a little shrine to me in the sidebar of his blog, and it's been there ever since.  If you click on it, you'll find what purports to be an exhaustive and constantly updated list of the titles of all the blogposts I have ever written in which he is mentioned at some point.  

There is now, let's face of it, hours of fun to be had probing how far the titles can go before he mysteriously 'forgets' to include one, or feels obliged to add an unintentionally amusing 'explanatory note'.  Let's see how he gets on with this one.

8 comments:

  1. No wonder Campbell avoids on-screen debates.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL I've thought that for years

      Delete
  2. Wee Stewie has had this post coming to him for a long time.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Q. How do you tell the difference between Wee Stewie and an oil painting?

    A. By looking.

    ReplyDelete
  4. A much-needed article, James. Turning the other cheek to Campbell doesn't work, never has, never will.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree. RevStu's post on X was disgraceful, unforgivable. James has been admirably restrained in his reply.

      Delete
  5. Campbell would be dangerous if his intellect matched his hatred.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thankfully not much danger of that

      Delete