Is this Indian a stacy?

[Mitakaa1341]

She's the only Indian woman that's stacy tier who actually looks INdian tbh

 

[standardcel]

Yes

 

[AgainstAllOdds]

Lol you have no clue bro. I know a couple indian foids that fog her hard, can send pics in dm if u want of one that ik irl

 

[Third Eye]

There are more of them. And that girl in your video is definitely stacy.

 

[BabuJi]

7/10
Stacey lite

 

[Mitakaa1341]

Lol you have no clue bro. I know a couple indian foids that fog her hard, can send pics in dm if u want of one that ik irl

Send. I never seen a better looking one than the one above

 

[greycel]

Yes

There are more of them. And that girl in your video is definitely stacy.

Lol you have no clue bro. I know a couple indian foids that fog her hard, can send pics in dm if u want of one that ik irl

7/10
Stacey lite

1. She is not a Stacy. A HTB is top 15%, a Stacylite is top 1%, a Stacy is top 0.05% (1/2000 people)
This is a low Stacylite for reference:

2. She’s in the HTB range with lots of falios such as bulbous nose, bad undertones, 0 bonemass.. the list goes on. The only reason she has even moderate appeal is because of her fillermaxxed lips (that look disproportionate on her face) + contact lens, giving her a whorish pheno

3. Even if she was a Stacy, she reached that through genetic recomb. Her children are very likely not going to have the same luck, they will inherit genes from her bloodline and any other ancestor. There’s no consistency to such genes
She will birth Incels.
Especially considering bonemass and pheno (race) -> genetic ceiling of the mother, matters the most if the child will be a mogger or not.
A white LTB has way better genes, in not just the looks department, but also the child’s height (on average), the child’s mineral bone density, the child’s grip strength (raw power), the child’s ability to fight (physicality), the child’s athleticism, the child’s IQ, memory...
She’ll also smell less, due to less strong body odour from unpleasant natural pheromones


All of this to say, she’s far from actually being good looking (1).
Even if she was good looking, and even more striking such as Aishwarya Rai, she’ll birth incels.. because there’s no genetic consistency + the mother’s genes matter the most (and pheno/race is the largest contributing factor, given that’s a difference of thousands of years of genes):

See her unideal bone mass + bad race (2)

If you want to know what will birth moggers, click this thread. I’ve linked my post, but you should read OP’s too:

Why female hypergamy is fundamentally flawed ( THE SUFFERING HAS JUST BEGUN )

A lot of incels thinks that eugenics, and especially the eugenics applied by women is a good thing for the human race overall. That is a false premise that leads to believe that we will see only uber mogger chads by 2050. this is a totally false prediction. Incels are being mass produced...

looksmax.org

(3)

We should rate according to one’s genes, and we can’t be rating everybody high for no reason. Not only is her looks bad, but her genes are comparatively worse (4).

 

[Third Eye]

1. She is not a Stacy. A HTB is top 15%, a Stacylite is top 1%, a Stacy is top 0.05% (1/2000 people)
This is a low Stacylite for reference:
View attachment 3666947

2. She’s in the HTB range with lots of falios such as bulbous nose, bad undertones, 0 bonemass.. the list goes on. The only reason she has even moderate appeal is because of her fillermaxxed lips (that look disproportionate on her face) + contact lens, giving her a whorish pheno

3. Even if she was a Stacy, she reached that through genetic recomb. Her children are very likely not going to have the same luck, they will inherit genes from her bloodline and any other ancestor. There’s no consistency to such genes
She will birth Incels.
Especially considering bonemass and pheno (race) -> genetic ceiling of the mother, matters the most if the child will be a mogger or not.
A white LTB has way better genes, in not just the looks department, but also the child’s height (on average), the child’s mineral bone density, the child’s grip strength (raw power), the child’s ability to fight (physicality), the child’s athleticism, the child’s IQ, memory...
She’ll also smell less, due to less strong body odour from unpleasant natural pheromones


All of this to say, she’s far from actually being good looking (1).
Even if she was good looking, and even more striking such as Aishwarya Rai, she’ll birth incels.. because there’s no genetic consistency + the mother’s genes matter the most (and pheno/race is the largest contributing factor, given that’s a difference of thousands of years of genes):
View attachment 3666982
View attachment 3666986
See her unideal bone mass + bad race (2)

If you want to know what will birth moggers, click this thread. I’ve linked my post, but you should read OP’s too:

Why female hypergamy is fundamentally flawed ( THE SUFFERING HAS JUST BEGUN )

A lot of incels thinks that eugenics, and especially the eugenics applied by women is a good thing for the human race overall. That is a false premise that leads to believe that we will see only uber mogger chads by 2050. this is a totally false prediction. Incels are being mass produced...

looksmax.org

(3)

We should rate according to one’s genes, and we can’t be rating everybody high for no reason. Not only is her looks bad, but her genes are comparatively worse (4).

That is still a better woman than most white women.

Most women, especially white, are fat.

That is the difference. And you know the fact is Indians are one of the most genetically similar ones.

 

[greycel]

That is still a better woman than most white women.

Most women, especially white, are fat.

That is the difference. And you know the fact is Indians are one of the most genetically similar ones.

They are far from being the most genetically similar
In fact there’s major objective contrast in lots of the traits I mentioned, they tend to be polar opposites.. such as a Slavic woman (strongest for women) has equivalent grip strength to a South Asian man (weakest for men)

And yes they might be overweight (not all too), but they have exponentially better genes. It’s all to do with genes. And that’s hard set through race
You can continue to prioritise “looks according to society”, but that means you prioritise social validation of having a gf that fits beauty standards (through makeup).. whereas true eugenics = evolution, what really matters, is genes

Not to mention, we are just talking about looks; races differ in factors that are 100x more important than fitting a looks model that society has created for you. Such as raw power/physicality, which is the true motivator for eugenics. How good will he survive in nature. Brains + brawn