Not being white is absolute suifuel

[Ultimate Subhuman™]

She isnt White at all from the looks of it

 

[Piratecel]

She isnt White at all from the looks of it

Yeah she definitely a Dalit with that green eyes and white skin

 

[Piratecel]

Damn man unfortunate I was born East African

Over

 

[Piratecel]

bump

 

[Indracelly]

A white goddess like this would never look at an ethnic male.


View attachment 3977884

Why did god have to deprive me of this?
No point to life honestly.

she looks asian

 

[Piratecel]

she looks asian

she doesn't have chink eyes, piss colored skin, and isn't maxilla 404

 

[Piratecel]

bump

 

[Michelangelo]

A white goddess like this would never look at an ethnic male.


View attachment 3977884

Why did god have to deprive me of this?
No point to life honestly.

You would be surprised

 

[TheStonerOne]

meds are literally better than nordics in everything historically, and they’re european so yes they’re white

1. The Mediterranean Sea is a transcontinental sea. The largest country within the Mediterranean Sea is Egypt. I wouldn't call the vast majority of Egyptians "white". I also wouldn't apply that arbitrary term to the majority of Moroccans, Algerians, Tunisians, Libyans or the majority of the populations of the Levant, Aegean Sea or Dodecanese. The idea that only the smaller "European" portion of the Mediterranean Sea are "Mediterranean" is FACTUALLY WRONG.

2. Calling all "Europeans" by the arbitrary term "white" is a false equivalence fallacy and presupposition. The first is obvious. "Europeans" vary in terms of average skin tone and physical appearance. The second is that ethnicity is determined by skin colour EVEN IF all "Europeans" are "white". Let's take Greece for example. Greece is far more phenotypically diverse than anywhere in Northern Europe. Most Greeks are not "pale". They are classified as "intermediate" and research into average skin tone places Greece closer to various "Middle Eastern countries" than to Northern Europe. But all of these peoples are "Greek". Greek ethnicity, like ethnicity in and of itself is determined by a common ancestry, culture and language.

If we mean "genetics" then this is vague. Which European component are we talking about? Southern? Northern? Finns have virtually no Southern European ancestry. Sardinians have virtually no Northern European ancestry. In the case of European Mediterraneans, then Iberia has a mix of the two with a detectable North African input. Northern Italy (which technically isn't in the Mediterranean but whatever) is similar to Iberia albeit with more Anatolian/Levantine/Caucasian ancestry and less North African. The latter gradually increases the further South you go and peaks in Sicily. Then the Balkans is also diverse with some countries having affinities to Eastern Europe and others resembling Northern Italy. Greece is the most diverse country in the Balkans and its genetic ancestry ranges from "similar to Northern Italy with a notable Slavic input" to "similar to West Asia" in regards to the Dodecanese (which isn't technically in Europe but whatever).

Then there's the fact that there are hilariously large distances between Balts and Finns and Southeastern Europeans, the fact that only Sardinians and Basques cluster with only other Sardinians and Basques. This idea of a "homogenous Europe" is baseless based on the current research. This isn't 2010; these outdated studies mean nothing. Europe IS diverse; it doesn't need to be an India to have differentiation.

3. What do you mean by "Europe"? All of Thrace is "European". Including the Turkish part. If you're one of those "Greeks are white Turks aren't" dolts, then why aren't there substantial genetic differences between Greek and Turkish Thrace? Also, if Turks aren't "white" you admit that not all "Europeans" are "white" because Thrace is in Europe but a "non-white" population lives in Europe. And let's get this out of the way. The population are *native* to Thrace. They speak Turkish because of language domination. They descend primarily from the pre-Turkic population and that is shown given the low genetic differences between the two parts of Thrace.

This also debunks (amongst other things) the ridiculous and laughable idea of "race". If Turkish Thracians are indeed "white" then it means that there aren't any major distinctions between "Europeans" and "Middle Easterners". There aren't notable genetic differences between the Asian and European parts of Turkey. If we took ridiculous claims of artificial borders "changing race" via a crossing, then we would also have to entertain the absurd idea that parts of Istanbul are where "race" changes.

4. Adding onto the last point, there are West Asians who have "white skin". Are they "white"? If not, why not? This doesn't compute. No, it is NOT due to "convergent evolution"; West Asians and Europeans (ESPECIALLY Southeast Europeans) share a substantial proportion of their direct ancestry. The genes for light skin in both are the SAME. The genes for blonde and ginger hair between both are the SAME. Conversely, darker skin in certain Europeans is NOT due to "tanning" (that logic ought to apply to Lebanese who share substantial ancestry with Southern Italians). Their skin is GENETIC. Why don't Afrikaaners have darker skin than Southeastern Europeans despite having been in hotter climates? It's NOT A TAN. They are BROWN.

TL;DR: To sum it up, how is a Saami akin to a Apulian? Sharing a continent doesn't equate the two.

 

[Deleted member 86877]

A white goddess like this would never look at an ethnic male.


View attachment 3977884

Why did god have to deprive me of this?
No point to life honestly.

Somalis mog

 

[goo25]

Yes

more so about the features then the skull

Meds and whites have very different features

they just are more exposed to the sun so they have tanned skintone and darker hair

skull and features are really similar especially in atlantomeds

1. The Mediterranean Sea is a transcontinental sea. The largest country within the Mediterranean Sea is Egypt. I wouldn't call the vast majority of Egyptians "white". I also wouldn't apply that arbitrary term to the majority of Moroccans, Algerians, Tunisians, Libyans or the majority of the populations of the Levant, Aegean Sea or Dodecanese. The idea that only the smaller "European" portion of the Mediterranean Sea are "Mediterranean" is FACTUALLY WRONG.

2. Calling all "Europeans" by the arbitrary term "white" is a false equivalence fallacy and presupposition. The first is obvious. "Europeans" vary in terms of average skin tone and physical appearance. The second is that ethnicity is determined by skin colour EVEN IF all "Europeans" are "white". Let's take Greece for example. Greece is far more phenotypically diverse than anywhere in Northern Europe. Most Greeks are not "pale". They are classified as "intermediate" and research into average skin tone places Greece closer to various "Middle Eastern countries" than to Northern Europe. But all of these peoples are "Greek". Greek ethnicity, like ethnicity in and of itself is determined by a common ancestry, culture and language.

If we mean "genetics" then this is vague. Which European component are we talking about? Southern? Northern? Finns have virtually no Southern European ancestry. Sardinians have virtually no Northern European ancestry. In the case of European Mediterraneans, then Iberia has a mix of the two with a detectable North African input. Northern Italy (which technically isn't in the Mediterranean but whatever) is similar to Iberia albeit with more Anatolian/Levantine/Caucasian ancestry and less North African. The latter gradually increases the further South you go and peaks in Sicily. Then the Balkans is also diverse with some countries having affinities to Eastern Europe and others resembling Northern Italy. Greece is the most diverse country in the Balkans and its genetic ancestry ranges from "similar to Northern Italy with a notable Slavic input" to "similar to West Asia" in regards to the Dodecanese (which isn't technically in Europe but whatever).

Then there's the fact that there are hilariously large distances between Balts and Finns and Southeastern Europeans, the fact that only Sardinians and Basques cluster with only other Sardinians and Basques. This idea of a "homogenous Europe" is baseless based on the current research. This isn't 2010; these outdated studies mean nothing. Europe IS diverse; it doesn't need to be an India to have differentiation.

3. What do you mean by "Europe"? All of Thrace is "European". Including the Turkish part. If you're one of those "Greeks are white Turks aren't" dolts, then why aren't there substantial genetic differences between Greek and Turkish Thrace? Also, if Turks aren't "white" you admit that not all "Europeans" are "white" because Thrace is in Europe but a "non-white" population lives in Europe. And let's get this out of the way. The population are *native* to Thrace. They speak Turkish because of language domination. They descend primarily from the pre-Turkic population and that is shown given the low genetic differences between the two parts of Thrace.

This also debunks (amongst other things) the ridiculous and laughable idea of "race". If Turkish Thracians are indeed "white" then it means that there aren't any major distinctions between "Europeans" and "Middle Easterners". There aren't notable genetic differences between the Asian and European parts of Turkey. If we took ridiculous claims of artificial borders "changing race" via a crossing, then we would also have to entertain the absurd idea that parts of Istanbul are where "race" changes.

4. Adding onto the last point, there are West Asians who have "white skin". Are they "white"? If not, why not? This doesn't compute. No, it is NOT due to "convergent evolution"; West Asians and Europeans (ESPECIALLY Southeast Europeans) share a substantial proportion of their direct ancestry. The genes for light skin in both are the SAME. The genes for blonde and ginger hair between both are the SAME. Conversely, darker skin in certain Europeans is NOT due to "tanning" (that logic ought to apply to Lebanese who share substantial ancestry with Southern Italians). Their skin is GENETIC. Why don't Afrikaaners have darker skin than Southeastern Europeans despite having been in hotter climates? It's NOT A TAN. They are BROWN.

TL;DR: To sum it up, how is a Saami akin to a Apulian? Sharing a continent doesn't equate the two.

because afrikaaners are quite recent immigrants lmao evolutionism doesnt happen in 400 years what are you yapping about

 

[Heightpilldealer]

Her crush
View attachment 3977898
Me
View attachment 3977899

You're just ugly

 

[TheStonerOne]

they just are more exposed to the sun so they have tanned skintone and darker hair

skull and features are really similar especially in atlantomeds

because afrikaaners are quite recent immigrants lmao evolutionism doesnt happen in 400 years what are you yapping about

1. Skin exposure alone doesn't cause darker skin. It's primarily GENETICS. It isn't just sun exposure. Why do the diaspora of "European" Mediterraneans have dark skin even in colder climates? Because it's NOT A TAN.

2. Western Eurasians in general overlap in craniofacial features.

3. Surely higher concentrations of sun exposure should darken Afrikaaners, right? Well, no. Because it's NOT A TAN. You can't pass on "tanned skin". Tanning is temporary. Afrikaaners derive their ancestry from populations with lighter skin than European Mediterraneans. No amount of sun exposure will change their natural skin colour. You just don't want to admit your precious "European Mediterraneans" are by and large BROWN.

 

[soggra]

they just are more exposed to the sun so they have tanned skintone and darker hair

The difference is that meds are light olive to tanned and have darker hair from birth while whites are pale to light pink-toned and have lighter hair since birth

skull and features are really similar

Not rly whites tend to have wider skulls, bigger foreheads and are mesocephalic to brachycephalic while meds are
dolichocephalic to mesocephalic

And as far as features go, meds have more prominent brow ridges, darker thicker eyebrows and eyelashes, and fuller lips, are shorter in height, and their philtrums are shorter

 

[mirinturbolowinhib]

Ethnic with blue eyes. So sorry not every ethnic is Somali or Indian
View attachment 3977896

Italians arent ethnics

 

[Piratecel]

bump