You are blue pilled
Nice incel shaming my fellow .is user
.Buckbroken and mentally colonized, or just a troll
?Not a rule in the slightest.
Mukokuseki - TV Tropes
Mukokuseki (ç¡å½ç±) is the deliberate lack of ethnic features included in the character design of Japanese fictional characters. It literally means "stateless" (i.e. "without nationality …
tvtropes.org
Phenotype Stereotype - TV Tropes
In real life, human appearances tend to be very varied even amongst the same ethnic groups. In fiction, you are going to be very lucky if you see that. An individual who is from one ethnicity will display all the stereotypical features of said …
tvtropes.org
Also, I love just how much of what I've said you ignored, so I'll ask again, my "Mediterranean", have you ever even interacted with a white person IRL
?Nah, he's just not a schizo.
Hitler was a true subhuman
He didn't have even Hunter eyes to look like the ultimate alpha male warrior.
It is not shaming but showing your hypocrisyNice incel shaming my fellow .is user
Noodlewhores themselves lust after Aryan Chads and they dream to have babies with blue eyes and blonde hairBuckbroken and mentally colonized, or just a troll
Not a rule in the slightest.
Mukokuseki - TV Tropes
Mukokuseki (ç¡å½ç±) is the deliberate lack of ethnic features included in the character design of Japanese fictional characters. It literally means "stateless" (i.e. "without nationality …tvtropes.org
Phenotype Stereotype - TV Tropes
In real life, human appearances tend to be very varied even amongst the same ethnic groups. In fiction, you are going to be very lucky if you see that. An individual who is from one ethnicity will display all the stereotypical features of said …tvtropes.org
I have interacted with white women online and they rejected me because I am not Aryan ChadAlso, I love just how much of what I've said you ignored, so I'll ask again, my "Mediterranean", have you ever even interacted with a white person IRL
You are all blue pilled kids who have no experience with women
Cherrypicking never ends
View: https://x.com/wayotworld/status/1775276433583280355
Have you noticed how some people use "bluepilled" as just an epithet?
What hypocrisy?
Jfl, I have tried irl many times, unlike you who seems to have not
Yup, knew it
Luigi Di Maio looks like a North Indian
Italian supporters
Muh we are the white we belong to the Aryan race haha
Jfl he looks ambiguous if anything
Anyone can throw on a football jersey, and I like how I shared a video form a verified news source
You claim to be white but still an incel
Your ignorance and larping as white tells that you never approached a woman in your life
Whites can be Incel, I mean come on all the OG stereotypes were school shooters or neckbeards
I have plenty of times dipshit, White foids were the nicest to me
Literally how am I hypocritical for knowing that I'm white
?Nonwhites' opinions on whiteness by definition don't matter much + I've never seen white sexpats claim to not have gotten laid for not having those traits.
Cool. I have interacted with white women my entire life and have never seen them turn down a good-looking guy if he happened to be brown-haired or -eyed, or be more lenient to an ugly guy just because he happened to have blue eyes or blonde hair. If anything, most people seem to agree that blonde hair is a minor failo for men while it's a boon for women.
The fucking temptation to mass tag the entire forum so they can read this be like
Your video shows no Aryans just inbred subhumansJfl he looks ambiguous if anything
Anyone can throw on a football jersey, and I like how I shared a video form a verified news source
If whites can be incels then what is the point of the master race ? that makes us realize that white is just being chad which means the only master race in the world is the Chad race. This is the true black pill.Whites can be Incel, I mean come on all the OG stereotypes were school shooters or neckbeards
Because you were a simp and they just used you as a nice guy
But you are not a chad so how you claim to have white genetics ? You don't have the perfect bone structure and eye area. Where is your hunter eyes ? this is the true black pill that you have to take.Literally how am I hypocritical for knowing that I'm white
Why is it okay for whites to have opinions on non whites but not the opposite ?
The Aryans were the first who classified human races and they colonized and enslaved ethnics and did the holocaust and we ethnics don't even have the right to tell out opinion on whites lol
Blonde women care about hair and eye color because they want their babies to resemble them also most Chads in Disney and Hollywood are portrayed with blonde hair even American propaganda portrayed ancient Greeks in movies like Alexander the great and Achilles with blonde hair.
You are free to do so. It's just a fact that when outsiders (any outsiders, not just nonwhites in relation to whites as in this example) go from holding opinions about some group to actually trying to define it and deciding who is a part of it or not, then that's inherently insulting and doesn't hold much weight since groups ultimately define themselves.
Everyone who has encountered people of other races has done the former, and it was often accompanied by the latter, such as when your ancestors interacted with mine
.The Trouble with Slavic Slaves | In Nomine Jassa
www.jassa.org
Nice consistency to ask me how can I claim to be white and then implicitly calling me so
. You clearly know who is white and who isn't and are just riling the forum up.Bruh, you do realize that children with those traits are born to couples without them or with just one parent like that literally all the time? Just in my family for example, I'm dark haired with green/blue eyes, my sister is a blue-eyed redhead, my first cousin from my father's side of the family is one of those blonde haired and blue eyed women you seem to yearn for so much, and my other first cousin from my mother's side is a blue eyed guy with dirty blond/light brown hair who's as far from a Chad as possible, not least because he's mentally disabled with an IQ of 70. Meanwhile, ALL of our parents are dark haired.
Maybe there are a few women who go for men with matching traits specifically to make sure about it, but if so I've never seen it with how common it is to see dark haired men with blonde women. Safeguarding your genetics doesn't really make sense when most of the population already carries the recessive genes needed for your children to have a good chance of inheriting your recessive traits regardless.
Really, it's bizarre how much those people seem to be worshipped by non-Europeans. You've talked about the true blackpill I need to take, but have you taken the blackpill that while you and many other nonwhites seem to damn near imagine some kind of a hair color/eye color caste system being in place in Europe, the fact is that the peple whom you seem to idolize and worship are literally just average normalfags and normalfagettes here? That it is only your countries where they get worshipped and here they are just average schmucks with nobody caring, since we can find another person just like them after walking five minutes on a street?
Role stereotype.
Alexander was probably the type who was lighter haired as a kid and then his hair darkened with age, since we have this fresco done for his father from when Alexander was young:
While Achilles' hair is described with terms that were often used to describe what we currently call blond or red(dish) hair, but admittedly not always and those could be mistranlations.
The theory of the “Caucasoid” race was first put forth by the German anthropologist Hans Blumenbach, not an Anglo-Saxon. It was refined over time into various subcategories, “white” being one, and modern genetics actually vindicates it. “Caucasoid” has been replaced by “West Eurasian” in modern anthropology, but it effectively means the same thing. Europeans also descend primarily from the same three ancient populations, form a coherent genetic cluster, and are largely closer related to one another than to any outgroups – proving the existence of the “white” race.
You made a ton of egregious and frankly brain-dead claims in this thread, but I don’t feel like addressing all of them as it’s a waste of time and I’m not entirely sure you’ll read this anyway. That said, I’ll address your 2nd most retarded claim too:
You aren’t oppressed by any stretch of the word. Quite the opposite actually, you’re a protected class. You can live comfortably leeching off welfare and get a slap on the wrist for going around starting riots, all while incessantly whining about your host group, who – if they weren’t spineless pussies and cucks – would have already had you deported or shot
Based response
U
JFL, have you ever traced the origin to the source? It doesn't even come from scientists, rather from a Belgian magazine that assures the testing was done stringently with no valid evidence:
The HISTORY Channel Nederland | HISTORY TV Nederland
Kom meer te weten over de tv-series van HISTORY. Hier kan je nog veel meer over jouw favoriete onderwerpen lezen en bekijken. HISTORY is alive.
www.history.com
They claim they collected saliva from several of Hitler's alleged relatives—one even from a thrown out napkin they picked up (JFL at their "rigorous" scientific methods). They also fail to specify how many relatives were tested or how most of them besides 2, were even related to Hitler. There might have only been 2 cases for all we know.
They also don’t clarify if both, or all these individuals had E1b1b or whether it could have come from another branch of their families. None of this can be independently verified; there’s no peer-reviewed scientific journal to support it, only an article in a magazine.
This was already a valid argument on its own:
Aside from your other painfully retarded statements, I'll tear this one and a few others down for you; Hitler having the E1b1b haplogroup is just another baseless, insult by Zionists against Hitler.
Virtually no German/Austrian has E1b1b. The odds of Hitler happening to have it are virtually impossible:
It's a story without proof, conducted by Zionists who clearly had an interest in fibbint, and whose work we cannot inspect.
That focuses on social discrimination and not legal and official racial classification. Both American historical and legal records show that Italians were consistently classified as white and Aryan, even during periods of significant anti-immigrant sentiment.
Judging based off of the content of your past replies, it would be fruitless to continue to argue with you
Last edited:
B
Getting sick and tired of this JBW racebaiting bullshit.
People saying North Italians are the real Italians could actually just be because the Med Sandnigger Italian mixed with Germanics over generations creating the North Italians and not the other way around as people claim.
I look at Greek people and they look exactly like Sandniggers from Saudi, Tunisia, Syria, Iraq. See for yourself in the video below what a Cyprus Greek looks like
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XJxVeWTN90
I
You just exposed yourself. Your ilk don't regard Ashkenazi Jews as "white" but Ashkenazi Jews were in that "European" cluster (if you actually paid attention, you'd see that Sicilians and Southern Italians were tilted eastwards). Also, I've seen that study more than I've seen my own hand and the authors of that study clearly state that Europeans tend to have more WHG (Western Hunter Gatherer) DNA than ANE (Ancient North Eurasian) but that doesn't apply to certain "European" groups:
"Two sets of European populations are poor fits for the model. Sicilians, Maltese, and Ashkenazi Jews have EEF estimates of >100% consistent with their having more Near Eastern ancestry than can be explained via EEF admixture (SI17). They also cannot be jointly fit with other Europeans (SI14), and they fall in the gap between European and Near Easterners
What's with the special pleading fallacy? You don't regard Ashkenazim as "white" because of their mixed genetic origins but you regard Sicilians as "white" despite the exact same genetic origins. Stop it with the "we wuz kangz" bullshit. Ethnicity isn't determined by skin colour anyways; it's determined by a common culture and ancestry and there's too much skin colour variation in either group to be labelled as one particular "race".
The only reason your folk wish to claim Greeks and (Southern) Italians as "yours" is because of what you perceive to be their achievements (ignoring their clear Near Eastern influences). If they had done none of that, you'd see them as you'd see a Lebanese person (apt especially considering the genetic affinity between the three).
Almost, but not quite.
JFL, are you some hardcore nordicist, or what? Modern European populations do not need continuous gene flow models and can be reasonably explained as mixtures of 3 ancestral populations (WSH, EEF, and WHG). That paper says they're genetically distinct within Europe, which is true for almost every regional group, not that they outright aren't Europeans all together.
We are also a very closely related/homogeneous group and share share a common ancestor as recently as 1000 years ago, whether you like it or not. We're far more homogeneous than the MENA populations you relate us to
That PCA is incorrect about Ashkenazim, they're converts from Khazaria. They descended from the Khazars, an amalgam of Turkic clans that settled the Caucasus in the early centuries CE and converted to Judaism in the 8th century.
That PCA clearly shows that they are genetically distinct. Are you even White?
No, jfl, southern italians are european, just most of them don't have arian genetics from indoeuropean invasions.
Who cares. Whiteness is American invention of their Anglo Saxon Protestant elite, and the more country becomes brown, the more they broaden the definition of whiteness. First only English, Scottish, Germans and Dutch were white (by Benjamin Franklin), then in 19th century they added French, Scandinavians, in early 20 century they added Slavs, Meds, Irish, now they are adding Arabs, Hapas, Turks, Iranians, Central Asians as whites...
I
Who's the "we"? A Spaniard derives more than 80% of his ancestry from EEF and a Englishman does not. It is NOT about merely deriving from sources. It is the AMOUNT you derive from said sources. Even AI undermines your nonsense claim.
"Haha, yes, that "we wuz kangz!" mentality and the attempts to shoehorn complex genetic data into simplistic, racially motivated narratives are indeed quite absurd and often frustrating to witness. It highlights a fundamental misunderstanding or deliberate distortion of the science.
You are absolutely right to point out the flawed logic in their arguments:
* **Focusing on Minor Differences While Ignoring Major Overlaps:** Their focus on the small amount of WHG ancestry in Greeks (and its near absence in Turks) while completely downplaying the massive overlap in EEF ancestry is a classic example of cherry-picking data to fit a preconceived notion. The EEF component represents a *much* larger proportion of the ancestry for both Greeks and Turks (specifically the Anatolian substrate of Turks) compared to the WHG component in Greeks.
* **Ignoring Proportions:** Population genetics isn't just about the *presence* of certain ancestral components, but their *proportions*. While both Greeks and Germans have WHG, EEF, and ANE ancestry, the *ratios* are significantly different. Greeks have a much higher proportion of EEF, while Germans have higher proportions of WHG and ANE. This difference in proportions is what drives the genetic distance and clustering patterns we see.
* **Defining "White" by Genetic Components:** The idea that having all three ancient European components (WHG, EEF, ANE) is the definition of being "white" is a completely arbitrary and non-scientific construction.
* **Historical Context:** The concept of "white" is a relatively recent social construct, not a biological one. It has evolved over time and varies across cultures.
* **Ignoring Global Diversity:** This definition completely ignores the vast genetic diversity within the human species and attempts to create an artificial, exclusive category based on a specific mix of ancient European ancestries.
* **What About Populations with Different Mixes?** What about populations outside of Europe who have different mixes of these or other ancient components? Are they not "white" by this definition? (Which, of course, they are not, but it exposes the absurdity of the definition).
* **The EEF Problem Again:** Crucially, the EEF component itself originated in the Middle East. So, by their own logic, having EEF ancestry means having ancestry from a region they often try to distance themselves from.
**Why the Greek-Turk vs. Greek-German Comparison is Telling:**
Your example of the Greek-Turk vs. Greek-German comparison is perfect.
* **Greek and Turk (Anatolian Substrate):** The shared high proportion of EEF ancestry (derived from the Near East) creates a strong genetic link between Greeks and the pre-Turkic populations of Anatolia (who form a significant part of modern Turkish ancestry). This shared deep ancestry is a major factor in their genetic similarity.
* **Greek and German:** While Greeks and Germans share some ancestry from all three components, the proportions are quite different. Germans have more WHG and ANE ancestry, which are less prominent in Greeks. This difference in proportions leads to a greater genetic distance compared to the Greek-Anatolian connection.
Therefore, based on the major ancestral components, a Greek often has a stronger genetic affinity to populations with high EEF ancestry (like the Anatolian substrate of Turks, Southern Italians, Cypriots, Lebanese) than to populations with higher WHG and ANE ancestry (like Germans).
These "we wuz kangz" interpretations are not about understanding science; they are about using scientific-sounding language to justify pre-existing racist beliefs. It's important to calmly and clearly explain what the genetic data *actually* shows and how it contradicts their claims.
It's a constant battle against the misapplication of science for ideological purposes."
I'm not getting in your DEBUNKED conspiracies about Ashkenazi Jews or your factually wrong statements about Europeans being homogenous or "one people". If you applied your standards of "genetic purity" (that doesn't exist) consistently, although no group would considered "white" by that stance, Greeks of all groups wouldn't be considered "white". They have too much Caucasian and Middle Eastern ancestry for that to happen. Besides, ethnicity has nothing to do with skin colour. Ethnicity is about a common culture and customs. The absurd statement of "Greeks being white" presupposes that skin colour determines Greek identity which it never has done. Most Greeks would not even fit the description of "white" even in its most colloquial senses. So why the special pleading fallacies regarding Greeks you would not offer to other admixed groups like Ashkenazim and Turks? Because it burns your dumb ideology.
Last edited:
I
Benjamin Franklin didn't consider the Scottish or Dutch "white". He didn't consider Germans (other than the Saxons) as "white". He only considered the English to be "white".
Benjamin Franklin, Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind:
"The Number of purely white People in the World is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny. Asia chiefly tawny. America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who with the English, make the principal Body of White People."
And yes, the concept of "whiteness" is largely an Anglosphere concept. This is NOT Greeks or Italians see themselves. There is a lot more phenotypic and genetic diversity in Greeks and Italians than there is in Englishmen. There ARE "White Greeks" but that doesn't mean that we classify a heterogeneous ethnic group as "white" especially since the majority of Greeks fail to meet that physical definition.
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
- SilverBullet
