Im so confused about what is the ideal skintone for males

Pale, reddish undertone signalling high T

1693966620084
 
  • JFL
Reactions: BrahminBoss
View attachment 2399820

he has light brown skin with red undertones giving him an orange tint. If Ramirez overdosed on lycopene and MSM he would have similar skin finish
bitch you smoking crack if you tihnk that's light brown lol
you should sell your crack roccs instead of smoking it you fool go rope immediately
 
On the one hand ,being white especially WASP is high class and exudes aristocracy. But is it due to skin tone or phenotype? For example Alain Delon pale white vs with a tan where he is light brown - he looks equally aristocratic in both:

View attachment 2399773View attachment 2399775


So when white people say "white is right" or some variation they are refferring to the WASP phenotype mainly? But why then some iranid shitskins and turks who look more ethnic than even some dravidians post their whitewashed hand and act like its ideal? When the white phenotype facially is what is most important?

Surely Gandy doesnt become dravidian because he tanned to medium brown in his D and G advertisements

View attachment 2399781


So perhaps it is a problem of different undertones rather than skin tone by itself? But there are studies claiming that women find darker men especially those tanned to light brown skin the most attractive regardless of race


But perhaps if we go deeper it is a cultural problem, and some cultures find fair men attractive like gooks?



However from the face of it we can ourselves notice light brown skin being the most attractive and exudes the most masculinity and sex appeal

View attachment 2399786


We also know that lower contrast in the face means higher degree of masculinity, so is it the case that for dark haired men, light brown skin is ideal (as it lessens overall contrast) and for blonde men remaining as fair as possible is ideal (Due to the being lighter tone)? The question also is a conflict between dimorphism due to melanin vs dimorphism exhibited by lower facial contrast


So does the question ultimately hinge upon different phenotypes (and thus different undertones) having different skin tone ideals and also being culturally impacted? If so what are those ideals and how would one go about assessing it (the question then becomes if darker skin tones also set different standards for sex appeal such as women wanting darker men for ONS and fair men for LTRs)

AFAIK no such study has been done. My take is that ethnics have really shitty undertones and must remain at light brown to mask grey undertones and try to overdose on carotenoid supplements such as lycopene lutein astaxanthin etc to try and get better undertones. Ultimately I think its a question of phenotype and there are fair men with ethnic phenotypes and darker men with more caucasoid shifted phenotypes. I think having the latter as your base is better as it is easy to bleach skin colour if you tend to be on the darker side.

doesn't matter. albino blacks will never get any love. If you have white genes, you'll have the white phenotypes, so even if you jump in a pool of vantablack you will attract woman. JBW IZ LAW
 
Europeans have reddish undertones, while Etnikks are either ashbrown, yellowish brown or olive brown, which gives them the dirty brown colour withy hyperpigmentation on ellbows, knees, knuckles and neck. Europeans tan different
So what is the solution for ethnics
 
Fid
@BrahminBoss

I would argue that currently, in 2023, for men, having light skin and high-contrast coloring is ideal.

I would prove this by comparing Indians to whites. Now Indians are actually considered Caucasoid. As it turns out, apart from the skin color, we look pretty similar. Of course, there are some other differences, like the nose or the orbits. But whites and Indians look similar.
So Indians are essentially dark-skinned white people.

Now look at the perceived attractiveness of these two groups in society. Indians are generally seen as the least attractive group in the west except from maybe south east asians. Even in India, the whiter you are, the better. You can see this in Bollywood. This is the case for males and females.
Now then, you've got to ask, Why is that? Do the genes that determine melanin somehow also affect how nice of a person you are? Does whiteness equal niceness? Well, it certainly correlates (whiteness is correlated with economic prosperity; economic prosperity = more developed society = higher moral character). I don't think that's why, as even Indian men who have little relation to Indian culture are seen as unattractive in the west. Now as to why dark skin skin is unattractive on Caucasians: I don't know.
Did you find any solution?
 
  • Hmm...
Reactions: Spiritualcell
On the one hand ,being white especially WASP is high class and exudes aristocracy. But is it due to skin tone or phenotype? For example Alain Delon pale white vs with a tan where he is light brown - he looks equally aristocratic in both:

View attachment 2399773View attachment 2399775


So when white people say "white is right" or some variation they are refferring to the WASP phenotype mainly? But why then some iranid shitskins and turks who look more ethnic than even some dravidians post their whitewashed hand and act like its ideal? When the white phenotype facially is what is most important?

Surely Gandy doesnt become dravidian because he tanned to medium brown in his D and G advertisements

View attachment 2399781


So perhaps it is a problem of different undertones rather than skin tone by itself? But there are studies claiming that women find darker men especially those tanned to light brown skin the most attractive regardless of race


But perhaps if we go deeper it is a cultural problem, and some cultures find fair men attractive like gooks?



However from the face of it we can ourselves notice light brown skin being the most attractive and exudes the most masculinity and sex appeal

View attachment 2399786


We also know that lower contrast in the face means higher degree of masculinity, so is it the case that for dark haired men, light brown skin is ideal (as it lessens overall contrast) and for blonde men remaining as fair as possible is ideal (Due to the being lighter tone)? The question also is a conflict between dimorphism due to melanin vs dimorphism exhibited by lower facial contrast


So does the question ultimately hinge upon different phenotypes (and thus different undertones) having different skin tone ideals and also being culturally impacted? If so what are those ideals and how would one go about assessing it (the question then becomes if darker skin tones also set different standards for sex appeal such as women wanting darker men for ONS and fair men for LTRs)

AFAIK no such study has been done. My take is that ethnics have really shitty undertones and must remain at light brown to mask grey undertones and try to overdose on carotenoid supplements such as lycopene lutein astaxanthin etc to try and get better undertones. Ultimately I think its a question of phenotype and there are fair men with ethnic phenotypes and darker men with more caucasoid shifted phenotypes. I think having the latter as your base is better as it is easy to bleach skin colour if you tend to be on the darker side.

tan for caucasians, lightskin for blacks.
 
  • +1
Reactions: BrahminBoss
IMG 2713
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: BrahminBoss
No skin tone is ideal, just be chad
 
  • Love it
Reactions: BrahminBoss

Similar threads

BrahminBoss
Replies
37
Views
817
SidharthTheSlayer
SidharthTheSlayer
6
Replies
12
Views
561
gribsufer1
gribsufer1
mortis
Replies
52
Views
2K
lightskinbengali
lightskinbengali

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top