Artemis
Kraken
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2022
- Posts
- 10,084
- Reputation
- 16,711
I was in Turkey for quite a while, and of course I decided to share some autistic observations of mine concerning the average appearance of males and females in Turkey vs Finland + Sweden.
As all people know, Scandinavian males are often considered the golden standard of male beauty all across the world.
What makes Nerdics so attractive?
Can they be mogged?
And how do Turks measure up?
If you want to know, read the next few paragraphs.
The typical swedish/finnish face looks like this:
These 2 averaged faces represent the inhabitants of Helsinki capital region quite well. In fact, this is almost indistinguishable from an average Swede, mostly due to intermixing. There is also another phenotype in Finland, which you rarely come across:
And of course a lot smaller phenotypes, which are not worth mentioning. We will concentrate on a typical Finnish-Swedish pheno, which was presented in the first 2 pictures.
Now, the average Turkish face from what I saw in Istanbul is somewhat similar to this phenotype:
In Istanbul, the most interesting observation was that a SMALL MINORITY of TURKS were WHITE actually. Or more precisely: CAUCASIAN WHITE. You would not be able to tell if those turks are actually turks, unless they speak Turkish. Moreover, there are even BLONDE Turks, which was quite a surprising discovery. However, for the simplicity, and since the minority IS a minority, we consider Turks to look like their phenotype images above.
So, what makes Nerdics attractive? Well, the formula consists of 7 simple things:
1) High prominent cheekbones
This automatically makes the face TAPERED. What does tapered mean? Well, it does NOT mean, that people have hollow cheeks (though many do). It means that the upper part of the face, near the eyes, is wider than the lower part of the face, at the jaw level. It looks like the face is gradually tapering downwards. This is EXACTLY the stereotypical model/actor look because it signifies low body fat percentage, even if the person is fat. This is all thanks to high prominent cheekbones. Many Nordics have this facial structure shine even at 25+% bodyfat. No matter how fat the Nerdic is, he/she will look "lean". However, for Turks, this is not the case. An average Turk has cheekbones 404:
This means, Turks have to keep a VERY LOW BODY FAT PERCENT so that their face does not turn into an inverted triangular shape:
If this guy had prominent high cheekbones, he would have looked a lot leaner.
2) HEIGHT
This is the worst part. The average height for young male Scandinavians is ~181 cm, which IS TALL. The average male Turk is 174 cm tall. THIS IS A HUGE DISCREPANCY.
While living in the center of Istanbul, I performed an experiment. I walked in my shoes (177 cm + 5cm shoes = 182 cm) and counted EVERY MALE WHO WAS UNDER 35 (visually) and who was taller than me. Randomly. Results? Out of FIFTY (50) people i met which satisfied the "youth"-criterion, only ONE (1) was taller than me! And not by much! Istanbul is the largest metropolitan area of Turkey. It means outside, in e.g. Ankara, the people are even shorter.
What it means? It means in practice that the height-mog by Scandinavians is non-survivable for Turks. If you are 5'10 (177cm), you will feel TALL IN TURKEY. Yes, there will be a tallfag here and there to height-mog you, BUT eventually, they are so few in between, that insignificant, while in Finland, at 5'10, you will be mogged by 70% young males AND maybe 10% young females.
In Istanbul, I met quite a few CHADLETs. BUT it immediately dawn on me, that no matter how good their faces were, at the height of 5'7, they could not mog even me. And what is the point comparing them to MTN tallfags in Scandinavia? Like it or not:
MTN Tallfag > Chadlet
Also, in Turkey, I saw A LOT of guys who were around 5'8, ULGY/AVERAGE fat faces (LTN/MTN), but were walking with girls, who seemed quite into their manlets. IF YOU ARE A TALLFAG IN TURKEY, and a virgin, YOU NEED TO TREAT AUTISM not cut YOUR FACE. If you are 5'10+ in Turkey, it is INEXCUSABLE that you are not popular with women. At 5'10+ you simply MOG MOST YOUNG POPULATION, like 70% of it. And if you have a straight nose and white skin... oh my... we will come to the noses later.
Continue reading
3) JAWS.
Surprisingly, I noticed that TURKS HAVE BETTER JAWS THAT SCANDINAVIANS ON THE AVERAGE. I have no explanation for this, since if Scandinavians have better brow-ridges and cheekbones, it makes no sense that their jaws are worse on the average. Thus, it might be just a bias.
4) EYES
This goes to... Scandinavians. They simply have better, more developed brow ridges. It results in deep set eyes. Not having deep set eyes is one of the biggest failos a man can have. In Scandinavia, even females have deep set eyes. This is not a favourable characteristic of a womanly face by many, but in my opinion deep set eyes on a woman look beautiful, if not a little masculine:
As you see, only 1 Turkish girl on the left has deep set eyes, the other 2 have prominent hooded eyes. Unfortunately for Turks, males have these commonly too.
5) Facial leanness
This is quite interesting. The point is: NO MATTER HOW GOOD YOUR BONES ARE, if you do not have thin skin and favourable fat pads in the face, your skeletal structure will NEVER shine as well as it could. I know, because i have thick skin, and it wraps your bones like a blanket.
Scandinavians mostly have LITTLE FAT IN THEIR CHEEKS and FACE. This determines completely how their face looks: it looks LEAN.
However, i noticed that this is not the case for turks. Many of them have quite fat faces, with prominent buccal fat pads and thick skin in general.
The only good thing about having thick skin and big fat pads in the face is that Turks AGE BETTER than Scandinavians. Also, Turkish women never look skeletonized like Scandinavian women.
Facial LEANNESS is in itself IS A STRONG AND MOST IMPORTANT PREDICTOR OF FACIAL ATtRACTIVENESS. Forget about jaw angles, size of your cheekbones, and degrees of canthal tilt: HAVE A LEAN FACE, no matter what it takes. For scandinavians, it is easier due to prominent cheekbones and favourable fat distribution. For a Turk to look good, it requires BEING IN HOLOCAUST MODE ALWAYS.
6) COLORING
THIS GOES to TURKS. No matter how one looks at it, black hair >> white hair. And Turks do not have black enough skin to negate the positive of the dark hair coloring. Most importantly, Turks have visible eyebrows. Which is 50% of eye area attractiveness:
against
7) Noses
Could not skip this. TURKISH NOSES ARE TERRIBLE. Specifically, they are hooked with droopy tips. While it is an automatic death sentence for many Turkish females:
for males it does not add any points, and needs to be fixed. In fact, if someone distinguishes Turks as ethnics, it is mostly due to their NOSES:
So, WHO MOGS?
Scandinavians have better:
NOSES
CHEEKBONES
LEANNESS
EYES
HEIGHT
Turks have better:
COLORING
JAWS
But in general, HEIGHT + PROMINENT CHEEKBONES is what gives Nerdics a significant mog over Turks. For Turks, it is LL or death.
NERDICS MOG.
PS. I never mention race (which i like to do because it is important) because wanted to compare only looks, and race is a status-pill in disguise. Of course, this matters the MOST. Take it as you like.
Disclaimer: the post was based on my personal opinions so here are your sources:
As all people know, Scandinavian males are often considered the golden standard of male beauty all across the world.
What makes Nerdics so attractive?
Can they be mogged?
And how do Turks measure up?
If you want to know, read the next few paragraphs.
The typical swedish/finnish face looks like this:
These 2 averaged faces represent the inhabitants of Helsinki capital region quite well. In fact, this is almost indistinguishable from an average Swede, mostly due to intermixing. There is also another phenotype in Finland, which you rarely come across:
And of course a lot smaller phenotypes, which are not worth mentioning. We will concentrate on a typical Finnish-Swedish pheno, which was presented in the first 2 pictures.
Now, the average Turkish face from what I saw in Istanbul is somewhat similar to this phenotype:
In Istanbul, the most interesting observation was that a SMALL MINORITY of TURKS were WHITE actually. Or more precisely: CAUCASIAN WHITE. You would not be able to tell if those turks are actually turks, unless they speak Turkish. Moreover, there are even BLONDE Turks, which was quite a surprising discovery. However, for the simplicity, and since the minority IS a minority, we consider Turks to look like their phenotype images above.
So, what makes Nerdics attractive? Well, the formula consists of 7 simple things:
1) High prominent cheekbones
This automatically makes the face TAPERED. What does tapered mean? Well, it does NOT mean, that people have hollow cheeks (though many do). It means that the upper part of the face, near the eyes, is wider than the lower part of the face, at the jaw level. It looks like the face is gradually tapering downwards. This is EXACTLY the stereotypical model/actor look because it signifies low body fat percentage, even if the person is fat. This is all thanks to high prominent cheekbones. Many Nordics have this facial structure shine even at 25+% bodyfat. No matter how fat the Nerdic is, he/she will look "lean". However, for Turks, this is not the case. An average Turk has cheekbones 404:
This means, Turks have to keep a VERY LOW BODY FAT PERCENT so that their face does not turn into an inverted triangular shape:
If this guy had prominent high cheekbones, he would have looked a lot leaner.
2) HEIGHT
This is the worst part. The average height for young male Scandinavians is ~181 cm, which IS TALL. The average male Turk is 174 cm tall. THIS IS A HUGE DISCREPANCY.
While living in the center of Istanbul, I performed an experiment. I walked in my shoes (177 cm + 5cm shoes = 182 cm) and counted EVERY MALE WHO WAS UNDER 35 (visually) and who was taller than me. Randomly. Results? Out of FIFTY (50) people i met which satisfied the "youth"-criterion, only ONE (1) was taller than me! And not by much! Istanbul is the largest metropolitan area of Turkey. It means outside, in e.g. Ankara, the people are even shorter.
What it means? It means in practice that the height-mog by Scandinavians is non-survivable for Turks. If you are 5'10 (177cm), you will feel TALL IN TURKEY. Yes, there will be a tallfag here and there to height-mog you, BUT eventually, they are so few in between, that insignificant, while in Finland, at 5'10, you will be mogged by 70% young males AND maybe 10% young females.
In Istanbul, I met quite a few CHADLETs. BUT it immediately dawn on me, that no matter how good their faces were, at the height of 5'7, they could not mog even me. And what is the point comparing them to MTN tallfags in Scandinavia? Like it or not:
MTN Tallfag > Chadlet
Also, in Turkey, I saw A LOT of guys who were around 5'8, ULGY/AVERAGE fat faces (LTN/MTN), but were walking with girls, who seemed quite into their manlets. IF YOU ARE A TALLFAG IN TURKEY, and a virgin, YOU NEED TO TREAT AUTISM not cut YOUR FACE. If you are 5'10+ in Turkey, it is INEXCUSABLE that you are not popular with women. At 5'10+ you simply MOG MOST YOUNG POPULATION, like 70% of it. And if you have a straight nose and white skin... oh my... we will come to the noses later.
Continue reading
3) JAWS.
Surprisingly, I noticed that TURKS HAVE BETTER JAWS THAT SCANDINAVIANS ON THE AVERAGE. I have no explanation for this, since if Scandinavians have better brow-ridges and cheekbones, it makes no sense that their jaws are worse on the average. Thus, it might be just a bias.
4) EYES
This goes to... Scandinavians. They simply have better, more developed brow ridges. It results in deep set eyes. Not having deep set eyes is one of the biggest failos a man can have. In Scandinavia, even females have deep set eyes. This is not a favourable characteristic of a womanly face by many, but in my opinion deep set eyes on a woman look beautiful, if not a little masculine:
As you see, only 1 Turkish girl on the left has deep set eyes, the other 2 have prominent hooded eyes. Unfortunately for Turks, males have these commonly too.
5) Facial leanness
This is quite interesting. The point is: NO MATTER HOW GOOD YOUR BONES ARE, if you do not have thin skin and favourable fat pads in the face, your skeletal structure will NEVER shine as well as it could. I know, because i have thick skin, and it wraps your bones like a blanket.
Scandinavians mostly have LITTLE FAT IN THEIR CHEEKS and FACE. This determines completely how their face looks: it looks LEAN.
However, i noticed that this is not the case for turks. Many of them have quite fat faces, with prominent buccal fat pads and thick skin in general.
The only good thing about having thick skin and big fat pads in the face is that Turks AGE BETTER than Scandinavians. Also, Turkish women never look skeletonized like Scandinavian women.
Facial LEANNESS is in itself IS A STRONG AND MOST IMPORTANT PREDICTOR OF FACIAL ATtRACTIVENESS. Forget about jaw angles, size of your cheekbones, and degrees of canthal tilt: HAVE A LEAN FACE, no matter what it takes. For scandinavians, it is easier due to prominent cheekbones and favourable fat distribution. For a Turk to look good, it requires BEING IN HOLOCAUST MODE ALWAYS.
6) COLORING
THIS GOES to TURKS. No matter how one looks at it, black hair >> white hair. And Turks do not have black enough skin to negate the positive of the dark hair coloring. Most importantly, Turks have visible eyebrows. Which is 50% of eye area attractiveness:
against
7) Noses
Could not skip this. TURKISH NOSES ARE TERRIBLE. Specifically, they are hooked with droopy tips. While it is an automatic death sentence for many Turkish females:
for males it does not add any points, and needs to be fixed. In fact, if someone distinguishes Turks as ethnics, it is mostly due to their NOSES:
So, WHO MOGS?
Scandinavians have better:
NOSES
CHEEKBONES
LEANNESS
EYES
HEIGHT
Turks have better:
COLORING
JAWS
But in general, HEIGHT + PROMINENT CHEEKBONES is what gives Nerdics a significant mog over Turks. For Turks, it is LL or death.
NERDICS MOG.
PS. I never mention race (which i like to do because it is important) because wanted to compare only looks, and race is a status-pill in disguise. Of course, this matters the MOST. Take it as you like.
Disclaimer: the post was based on my personal opinions so here are your sources:
Last edited:
