F
Unironically the darker your skin is, the uglier and more incel you are. Unless you have good coloring which is rare because only ethnic chads have them and they only make up about 1% of the ethnic population.
I'm brown, opinion discarded.
F
Ethnic cope
Ethnic cope
D
I'm native american
@kanyepilled thoughts?
I'm a sand nigger but have pink-white skin. just like the prophet mohamad
just like the prophet mohamad
Same but my face is a bit yellowish, the rest of my body is pink white.
Stop with the bullshit copes.
Here's a dark curry, even though he is dark as fuck he still mogs most men. Admit that you are too lazy to try and looksmaxx (mewing, gymcelling, eyebrow grooming, etc) so you blame it on your skin color.
my skin is detrimentally white
would be better looking if he was light skin tbhHere's a dark curry, even though he is dark as fuck he still mogs most men. Admit that you are too lazy to try and looksmaxx (mewing, gymcelling, eyebrow grooming, etc) so you blame it on your skin color.
I beg to differ, he looks exotic and unique this way.
wtf is this coping
women don't care about exotic or unique, they care about how attractive you are.
wtf is this coping
women don't care about exotic or unique, they care about how attractive you are.
exotic and unique
Gets mogged to oblivion by the average white maleStop with the bullshit copes.
Here's a dark curry, even though he is dark as fuck he still mogs most men. Admit that you are too lazy to try and looksmaxx (mewing, gymcelling, eyebrow grooming, etc) so you blame it on your skin color.
Mogs me stupendously hard
Exoticness is an attraction trait. This is the reason why a racial group like negroids lose their exotic bbc charm, become less attractive, and look uncanny when they have albinism.
Compare these two unattractive looking negroid males (I am not saying that all negroids are unattractive)
Albino Negroid (Light skin and blond hair), light hair and skin didn't make him good-looking, it made him look worse.
Dark Negroid (Dark skin and black hair)
The dark negroid mogs the albino even though they are both not very facially attractive
Now lets do the same thing with the curry I posted
What he normally looks like
What he looks like with lighter skin and blond hair (I am not good at editing, but I tried)
Massive downgrade, he lost his charm and character.
Well he already looks attractive enough by modern standards. Has good jawline, eye shape, brows, and symmetry, that's all what you really need to attract a foid, he doesn't need to look any better or different than this. And I'm not making that shit up, it's backed by science
The main point of the study itself might be slightly offtopic but it mentioned the part I'm talking about in the abstract section
What the average white male looks like
You'd either have to be blind or extremely hypocritical to say that these guys mog the curry I posted in any way, shape, or form,
Last edited:
Literally proved my point
All your examples mogged him imo
Explain how they mogged him
wtf is this retarded coping lmao, fuck off with your shitty photoshop and cherrypicking
here's an ACTUAL average european male:
vs the average indian male:
the top low tier chadlite very clearly mogs the legit subhuman street shitter on the bottom
"ohh but the shitskin on the bottom has dark colors he's exotic and more attractive
"
G
Shit skin is over with ethnic foids.
Maybe it has a chance if you are a Tyrone with white foids.
Maybe it has a chance if you are a Tyrone with white foids.
D
@kanyepilled where the fuck are your eyebrows lmao
JBB>Everything else
too much sex. they fell off
true it's so over for dark niggas like meImagine being a dark skin, can’t relate
Last edited:
I am starting to question your mental capabilities right now.wtf is this retarded coping lmao, fuck off with your shitty photoshop and cherrypicking
here's an ACTUAL average european male:
View attachment 525851
vs the average indian male:
View attachment 525853
the top low tier chadlite very clearly mogs the legit subhuman street shitter on the bottom
"ohh but the shitskin on the bottom has dark colors he's exotic and more attractive
You first claimed that the chadlite curry I posted would look better with light skin, I posted a comparison between him with dark skin and light skin and made another comparison between albino negroids and dark negroids explaining how dark people look worse with a lighter skin tone.
You then change the topic to a comparison between the average curry and the average white male even though I was only comparing that particular chadlite curry with the average white male as a response to the claim of the other guy that the chadlite curry gets mogged by the average white male.
I never mentioned anything about the average curry male, I was merely emphasizing on how dark people don't look better when bleached.
These are not averages, these are just AI pictures.here's an ACTUAL average european male:
vs the average indian male:
the top low tier chadlite very clearly mogs the legit subhuman street shitter on the bottom
"ohh but the shitskin on the bottom has dark colors he's exotic and more attractive
The street shitter below would look worse than he currently is if he loses his exotic color and gets bleached to a lighter skin tone. This is the point that you completely overlooked in my previous reply.
wow, you're retarded. it's literally a bunch of people of one ethnicity overlayed to create what the 'average' would look like
being lighter = having lighter skinned genetics aka better looking genetics
I don't know about anybody else but I like my dark brown skin colour.
If you're stating the truth then I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem explaining it in depth rather than just spouting claims without evidence.
Tell me which one of them looks better or dominant and why exactly?
wow, you're retarded. it's literally a bunch of people of one ethnicity overlayed to create what the 'average' would look like
I know what facial averageness is, I am not an idiot. What I am saying is that these are not actual real averages of an entire population of a certain ethnicity. It's the basic rule in sampling and averageness that when the sample size is too small for a population the results will be skewd and inflated/deflated. In order for an average of a population to be accurate, the sample size used in a study must be big enough to represent the entire population.
There's a difference between "average faces from a certain population/area" and "average faces of a certain population/area"
These overlayed pictures (that look like AI btw) are not the average faces of a population, they are average faces from a population.
Unless there's a way to find out how many overlayed faces were used (how big is the sample size), we can't take these so-called "average faces" for granted.
Also selection bias and margin of error play a role in skewing the results of a population average, selection bias is when you pick specific individuals to be included in your sample instead of doing a random selection. The more random the more accurate, the more specific/cherrypicked the less accurate. Margin of error is the amount of error in the results of a study, the higher the margin of error the less credible/accurate the result is. Since there's also no way we can find out the percentage of selection bias and margin of error in this facial averageness study unless we see the sampling size used in the study then we can't take these average faces for granted.
Now what's the difference between "average faces from a certain population/area" and "average faces of a certain population/area"? The difference is that you can make an average face out of 4 or 10 or 1000 faces only, while it's technically an average, a sample size of 4 or 10 or 100 or 1000 is not enough to represent an entire population of 1.38 billion currys though.
Here's a chart to make things clear, since I don't have time to do complex maths for a population of 1.3 billion right now, just analyzing this chart and reaching a solid conclusion from it should be enough to get the point across.
The maximum population in this sampling table is 1 million so this is what we will focus on since it's the closest to 1.3 billion out of them all,
So basically the ideal sample size for the most accurate result in a 1 million population is 6 different variables ( 384, 1534, 9512, 663 2647, 16317) depending on something called confidence level and margin of error. As you can see the lower the margin of error the higher the sampling size should be (the bigger the sampling size the more credible and accurate as I stated above, that's why margin of error is low when a big sample size is used) and also the bigger the sampling size the higher the confidence level should be. According to dictionary, confidence level is a measure of the reliability of a result. A confidence level of 99 per cent or 0.99 means that there is a probability of at least 99 per cent that the result is reliable.
So basically the ideal sampling size (The amount of individuals being studied from a certain population) for a 1 million population is 16,317 with confidence level of 99% and margin of error of 1%, this is the most accurate you can get. Now this is when the population is 1 million, imagine when the population is 1.3 billion (as it should be). In order to meet a margin of error 1% the sampling size would be way much higher than that. Now how does this correlate with the facial averageness study?
In order for this face to accurately represent the entire population of india (we will just assume that the population is 1 mil to meet the standards of the table) it has to be made of 16.3k layers of random faces, which is impossible on a technical level (in reality the number would be even way higher than 16.3k since it's a a population of 1.3 billion). "But what about the 2.5% and 5% margin of error?" what about them? if a study lands in any of these two areas then it's a not accurate, because lower credibility and lower sample size. So either the facial averageness study has a 1% margin of error which is impossible since you can't morph 16.3k layers of face (or more) into a single face (without it looking distorted and deformed) or it has a higher margin of error which is the most likely explanation since the only way this study is technically possible to implement is with a smaller sample size anyway, hence the high margin of error, less accuracy and credibility.
This is a picture of 225 NBA Athletes morphed into a single face, you can see how it's already starting to distort and look blurry with only 225 overlays, imagine what it would like with 16k overlays (or higher)
Last edited:
i'm not reading that greycel
Also one thing I forgot to mention, the facial averageness study you provided was made by an internet stormfag named Karsten Reuß, not an actual scientific institution. Which may or may not mean anything, but it could also indicate a higher selection-bias as I indicated above since the creator is an ultra white nationalist and is not a professional in the matter. While I really don't have many problems with stormfags since I share a lot of anti-semitic, anti-racemixing views, and some views about the different intelligence levels between races with them, I still wouldn't trust such a study (unless it was unbiased, which is unlikely since it was made by an autistic white nationalist not an actual scientist).
Last edited:
I’m tan brown
I'm a ricecel with pale skin and red undertones, still invisible to 100% of women
I have pale skin and look unhealthy.
I am a shitskin curry!
Henry of Skalitz
D
am a darkskinned africancel. you know it's over for you when you are considered dark-skinned by other blacks.
I'm a pale-skinned half-Asian/half-white hapa and I'm truecel as fuck. In school there were lots of brown-skinned hapa/Asian/Latina girls who would tease me about my pale skin.
I'm hispanic and i admit that even gingers mog beaners.I'm a sand nigger but have pink-white skin.
Caca-colored skin is a curse
Still not as attractive as a white male
P
Brutal.
i am slav
I am the darkest individual of my maternal side.
I look like I am ready to step onto the set of the sopranos and eat cappacuolo, ova here.
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
