Serious The mods have got their sights on me

[anandkonda]

So you think the preference is biological?

No all the places were impacted by global and universalized standard for dark skin was my point

 

[anandkonda]

There is no debate whether Aryans were outsiders or not. It’s obvious.

Depends on what you define as "Aryan". Invasion part of it is bullshit, may be migration then yes

Btw this whole conversation is diverting the original point of this thread jfl.

Still, fun talking to a kike like you about stuff

 

[anandkonda]

Just says there is an association between prevalence of genes for light skin and caste.

Ok how much association? But does it explicitly say that upper castes are fairer skinned?

Also how can we say this is because of ancient "Aryan" genes and not because of working in Sun. Lower castes worked more in the fields, so of course they would be darker

 

[anandkonda]

The suttas are much more ancient texts and from India, while the Ashoka story of killing people is a much later text written in Sri Lanka. One is a literal religious text from the period while the other is a chronology trying to glorify their own tradition's history from a far away land.

No my point is would you trust Muslim descriptions of Jews?

 

[anandkonda]

Just says there is an association between prevalence of genes for light skin and caste.

That would prove nothing actually. Upper caste Rajputs in UP (where the study is done) were not always kshatriyas and were lower castes and tribals who later became kshatriyas

 

[anandkonda]

As I said, this is not true of the Aryans and in earlier literature. As I showed you the earlier vedic gods were light skinned and hated dark skinned people, especially because they were enemies of the Aryans. Darker skinned being incorporated in the later pantheon could simply just be a result of more indigenous gods being incorporated who were dark skinned like the people who worshipped them. We find dark skinned gods in many areas of the world where light skin was praised, like Pak Tai from China, Min from ancient Egypt, etc. As I said, were these characters seen as attractive DESPITE their dark skin or because of it? Because obviously dark skinned people can be attractive (unlike what the exaggerating JBW copers think).

Unlike those religions Gods and characters in Indian stories were over presentably dark skinned. Less than 15% of Indians are dark skinned while dark skinned Gods and characters are over represented.

No. This is irreverent even if this is true. My point is today dark skin is seen as ugly, when even latest Vishnu Avatar Balaji is dark skinned in South India. So clearly 2000 years ago in South India dark skin was not seen as ugly like today or they wouldn't have made Gods dark skinned.

The fair skin obsession everywhere not just India started because of globalized beauty standards for fair skin.

 

[Copexodius Maximus]

Depends on what you define as "Aryan". Invasion part of it is bullshit, may be migration then yes

Still, fun talking to a kike like you about stuff

Aryan = Indo-Iranians.
It does seem like bullshit of there being one giant invasion, but clearly there were skirmishes and wars between these groups once they were settled there already based on the Vedic writings.

Ok how much association? But does it explicitly say that upper castes are fairer skinned?

Also how can we say this is because of ancient "Aryan" genes and not because of working in Sun. Lower castes worked more in the fields, so of course they would be darker

genes = inherent skin colour regardless of the Sun.

No my point is would you trust Muslim descriptions of Jews?

It’s not just mocking Brahmins, but it’s showing what was considered beautiful/better. Skin colour discrimination were common in the early literature in many sources we have seen here.

Unlike those religions Gods and characters in Indian stories were over presentably dark skinned. Less than 15% of Indians are dark skinned while dark skinned Gods and characters are over represented.

No. This is irreverent even if this is true. My point is today dark skin is seen as ugly, when even latest Vishnu Avatar Balaji is dark skinned in South India. So clearly 2000 years ago in South India dark skin was not seen as ugly like today or they wouldn't have made Gods dark skinned.

The fair skin obsession everywhere not just India started because of globalized beauty standards for fair skin.

Brown skinned = dark.

That would prove nothing actually. Upper caste Rajputs in UP (where the study is done) were not always kshatriyas and were lower castes and tribals who later became kshatriyas

It just adds to the collection of evidence. The fact is that there is an association with caste and skin colour even today (although not as much as in ancient times).

Look up at the kalash in pakistan or nuristanis in Afghanistan. They still retained more aryan features due to living in isolation, and it’s quite obvious to see the reality of the Aryans In ancient times.

 

[anandkonda]

Aryan = Indo-Iranians.
It does seem like bullshit of there being one giant invasion, but clearly there were skirmishes and wars between these groups once they were settled there already based on the Vedic writings.

Then I agree. Those Indo-Iranians could be from Indus Valley Civilization. Latest DNA evidence shows IVC people having ancient Iranian DNA. IVC must have come into India when the saraswati river dried off.

Would make sense. IVC people had links and trade relations with various sandnigger civilizations.

genes = inherent skin colour regardless of the Sun.

No. Europeans had dark skin until 7000 years or something right? Natural selection for vitamin D makes people in less sunny environments fairer is what I though?

Hunter-gatherer European had blue eyes and dark skin

Genetic tests reveal that a hunter-gatherer who lived 7,000 years ago had the unusual combination of dark skin and hair and blue eyes.

www.bbc.com

People of close races have different heights because of environment and diet, why would it be the same case with skin color?

 

[lonelysince2006]

I'll get another warning if I talk about it

Is this about standshitting?

 

[anandkonda]

It just adds to the collection of evidence. The fact is that there is an association with caste and skin colour even today (although not as much as in ancient times).

It doesn't. Maybe I didn't make my point clearly. Let me

The Mahabharata, Book 12: Santi Parva: Mokshadharma Parva: Section CLXXXVIII

The Mahabharata, Book 12: Santi Parva: K.M. Ganguli translation, at sacred-texts.com

sacred-texts.com

This is from Mahabharata where Vedic time sages were discussing this

"The complexion the Brahmanas obtained was white; that which the Kshatriyas obtained was red; that which the Vaisyas got was yellow; and that which was given to the Sudras was black."

"There is really no distinction between the different orders. The whole world at first consisted of Brahmanas. Created (equal) by Brahman, men have, in consequence of their acts, become distributed into different orders. They that became fond of indulging in desire and enjoying pleasures, possessed of the attributes of severity and wrath, endued with courage, and unmindful of the duties of piety and worship,--these Brahmanas possessing the attribute of Passion,--became Kshatriyas. Those Brahmanas again who, without attending to the duties laid down for them, became possessed of both the attributes of Goodness and Passion, and took to the professions of cattle-rearing and agriculture, became Vaisyas. Those Brahmanas again that became fond of untruth and injuring other creatures, possessed of cupidity,--engaged in all kinds of acts for a living, and fallen away from purity of behaviour, and thus wedded to the attribute of Darkness, became Sudras."

So clearly from this all the Vernas were initially brahmins who later became their respective Vernas due to their behavior not race.

Bhrigu's further description makes it clear he was talking about their gunas not skin color. Forget Brahmins and Shudras, why were Kshatriyas red and Vaisyas yellow then? Doesn't make sense unless it's about their behavior and character, then it makes sense.

 

[BlackCel_from_ZA]

If they ban you, they can ban me too. The racepill is literally a core element of the blackpill. There is no blackpill without the racepill.

100% these coomskins really think your race doesn't play a role in physical attraction jfl. Muahhhh "race doesn't matter bro, it's not like its the first thing people see, when they view other people"

 

[anandkonda]

Brown skinned = dark.

No. Those Gods were literally described as being Black not Brown. Less than 5% of niggers here are black. Clearly dark skin was over represented in Mythologies and Gods.

The fact is that there is an association with caste and skin colour even today (although not as much as in ancient times).

I showed you in the Mahabharata there were many dark skinned brahmins and kshatriyas. Yadav brahmins were literally described as being dark skinned, so I would be surprised if it was the case.

Did the study actually say brahmins had fairer skin or not? If yes by how much than others?

 

[IncelTill.idie]

I'll get another warning if I talk about it

Use Morse code

 

[anandkonda]

It’s not just mocking Brahmins, but it’s showing what was considered beautiful/better. Skin colour discrimination were common in the early literature in many sources we have seen here.

I don't about rest of religions but in Jainism were created by Bharata Chakravartin (who has similarities with Manu) lastly after rest of varanas, opposite of Hinduism brahmins were created first. And I don't remember it being anything about color.

It’s not just mocking Brahmins, but it’s showing what was considered beautiful/better. Skin colour discrimination were common in the early literature in many sources we have seen here.

The example about Indra is pure speculation if you would ask me. The Parvati stuff is about avatar transformation she undergoes afterwards. And the in Buddhist example you provided a King was claiming brahmins said that, not brahmins themselves that too not talking about purity not beauty.

Ok even if all of them are true let's assume, there is some possibility of what you claim to be true.

Are there any such examples of dark skin being undesirable in South and Central India? These examples are only of North India