Analyzing to what extent "white traits" are objectively better looking

Deleted member 2012

Deleted member 2012

Magic
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Posts
5,964
Reputation
13,496
As blackpilled men, we already know that most of what we perceive as beautiful is hardwired into our DNA and that there are evolutionary reasons to why we find those traits attractive. For example, good hip to waist ratio in women is an indicative that she can give healthy childbirth, broad shoulders on man is an indicative of stength and athletic prowess, that's not cultural, this information was already hard wired into our brains from birth.

However, we cannot deny that culture also has a strong impact on what we perceive as beautiful, people from isolated tribes have shown that it's possible for humans to be conditioned to find the most bizarre traits attractive:

1608435135274
1608435143386


Does our modern society still uphold a lot of cultural standards of beauty? Or is that just a normie cope and in our modern world devoid from barbaric practices, nearly all that we find attractive is biological? To what extent does that relate to white people being perceived as the most attractive?

For a trait to be objectively better looking, it needs to be biological, it needs to have an evolutionary reason why it's more attractive, otherwise we can just assume it's cultural influence. So I made a list of white traits that are considered attractive and will analyze if it makes biological sense for them to be attractive or if it's just standards.

List of "attractive" traits that are more commonly, or more intensely found in European populations:

1. A thin nose with a high nose bridge

Nostril width evolved accordingly with the climate, wider noses being better suited for warm climates and vice versa.
So why is it that thin noses are now the standard everywhere? Is there any biological reason? Or it just cultural standards?

I feel like it's mostly cultural tbh, but if I had to point to a biological reason... The only thing that I can think of is that:

The thinner the nose is, the wider the mouth appears in comparison, improving the nose to mouth ratio. Having a mouth that is 1.6 times wider than the nose (golden ratio) is seen as the universal ideal, most people don't have such a wide mouth but having a thin nose helps give the impression of a wider mouth.

A high nose bridge on the other hand, as much as I researched, I could not find an explanation to its evolution. Maybe it's just a natural result of thinner noses. Although this theory doesn't sit well with eskimos, they live even further north than europeans and look at their noses:

View attachment 876897

I am really at a loss here. Maybe what happened with whites was just genetic drift after all (Random genetic mutations that occur in a population without natural selection)

In which case it would mean that finding european noses more attractive is just cultural bias.

2. Fair skin

Even normies will admit that around the world fair skin is revered. But they always attribute it to wealth, throughout history those who work outside in the sun (the poor low class) would get tanner and the rich would stay indoors and keep their fair complexion. A stigma grew around having dark skin because it was associated with poverty while a status halo grew around white skin. According to normies that's all there is to it, and it's just a matter of deprogramming this mentality.

But there is more to it than just that. Firstly, skin color is a dimorphic trait. Men are on average darker than women, higher rates of melanin are correlated with testosterone. That's why black men are usually attractive in a more masculine way and why black women are generally seen as unattractive by other races are are perceived as not feminine. That's why being light skinned matters more for female beauty than male.

So I believe the reason fair skinned women are more attractive is biological but the reason why fair skin in men is prefered is cultural.

3. Lighter eye colors

1598062994709.png


About 8 thousand years ago some random guy was born with a random mutation that gave him blue eyes.

That one guy’s SMV was so high that the trait spread all over Europe faster than the dark plague. To the point where in many northern European countries virtually EVERYONE has that trait.

This can mean one of two things:

The trait offered a significant survival advantage or the trait offered a significant advantage in sexual selection. I think it's pretty obvious what it was seeing that eskimos can see perfectly well in the arctic. It was considered more attractive. Blue eyes had never existed prior to that, and brown eyes were all people had ever been exposed to, yet it was still considered far more attractive.

If you think about it, it's pretty obvious, blue is most favorite color overall:

1597284500946
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 9090, Deleted member 5746, Looks234 and 11 others
Good white/european traits for me is thin nose, nose, eye color, brow ridge
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 10615
Beauty transcends purpose. It simply exists for its own sake.
 
  • +1
Reactions: doll, Deleted member 5746, Copeful and 2 others
all this shit is is just exposure theory and cultural learned fetish summarized your thread in 1 sentence
 
  • +1
Reactions: DharkDC, Deleted member 5746 and maxxedfalloutdweller
Light skin is expresses health indicators much better than dark skin. You can evaluate persons current vitality, it's transparent about a person's outward immediate appearance. It's emits a trusting response like familiarity but you need healthy skin to back it up.

Might be linked with security against infection.
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Deleted member 9090, hairyballscel and Good_Little_Goy
I feel like it's mostly cultural tbh, but if I had to point to a biological reason... The only thing that I can think of is that:

The thinner the nose is, the wider the mouth appears in comparison, improving the nose to mouth ratio. Having a mouth that is 1.6 times wider than the nose (golden ratio) is seen as the universal ideal, most people don't have such a wide mouth but having a thin nose helps give the impression of a wider mouth.
Thin noses are even more attractive on women than on men, and narrow mouths are more feminine-looking than wide mouths.

I think narrow noses are more attractive simply because they look elegant and "sleek," while wide noses look primitive and apelike.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 5746 and Copeful
Thin noses are even more attractive on women than on men, and narrow mouths are more feminine-looking than wide mouths.

I think narrow noses are more attractive simply because they look elegant and "sleek," while wide noses look primitive and apelike.

Overly narrow is bad but wide noses typically look bad because they simply take up too much sagittal space on the face.
 
  • +1
Reactions: thecel
Overly narrow is bad but wide noses typically look bad because they simply take up too much sagittal space on the face.

You mean, frontal

1609895799264
 
As blackpilled men, we already know that most of what we perceive as beautiful is hardwired into our DNA and that there are evolutionary reasons to why we find those traits attractive. For example, good hip to waist ratio in women is an indicative that she can give healthy childbirth, broad shoulders on man is an indicative of stength and athletic prowess, that's not cultural, this information was already hard wired into our brains from birth.

However, we cannot deny that culture also has a strong impact on what we perceive as beautiful, people from isolated tribes have shown that it's possible for humans to be conditioned to find the most bizarre traits attractive:

View attachment 880029View attachment 880030

Does our modern society still uphold a lot of cultural standards of beauty? Or is that just a normie cope and in our modern world devoid from barbaric practices, nearly all that we find attractive is biological? To what extent does that relate to white people being perceived as the most attractive?

For a trait to be objectively better looking, it needs to be biological, it needs to have an evolutionary reason why it's more attractive, otherwise we can just assume it's cultural influence. So I made a list of white traits that are considered attractive and will analyze if it makes biological sense for them to be attractive or if it's just standards.

List of "attractive" traits that are more commonly, or more intensely found in European populations:

1. A thin nose with a high nose bridge

Nostril width evolved accordingly with the climate, wider noses being better suited for warm climates and vice versa.
So why is it that thin noses are now the standard everywhere? Is there any biological reason? Or it just cultural standards?

I feel like it's mostly cultural tbh, but if I had to point to a biological reason... The only thing that I can think of is that:

The thinner the nose is, the wider the mouth appears in comparison, improving the nose to mouth ratio. Having a mouth that is 1.6 times wider than the nose (golden ratio) is seen as the universal ideal, most people don't have such a wide mouth but having a thin nose helps give the impression of a wider mouth.

A high nose bridge on the other hand, as much as I researched, I could not find an explanation to its evolution. Maybe it's just a natural result of thinner noses. Although this theory doesn't sit well with eskimos, they live even further north than europeans and look at their noses:

View attachment 876897

I am really at a loss here. Maybe what happened with whites was just genetic drift after all (Random genetic mutations that occur in a population without natural selection)

In which case it would mean that finding european noses more attractive is just cultural bias.

2. Fair skin

Even normies will admit that around the world fair skin is revered. But they always attribute it to wealth, throughout history those who work outside in the sun (the poor low class) would get tanner and the rich would stay indoors and keep their fair complexion. A stigma grew around having dark skin because it was associated with poverty while a status halo grew around white skin. According to normies that's all there is to it, and it's just a matter of deprogramming this mentality.

But there is more to it than just that. Firstly, skin color is a dimorphic trait. Men are on average darker than women, higher rates of melanin are correlated with testosterone. That's why black men are usually attractive in a more masculine way and why black women are generally seen as unattractive by other races are are perceived as not feminine. That's why being light skinned matters more for female beauty than male.

So I believe the reason fair skinned women are more attractive is biological but the reason why fair skin in men is prefered is cultural.

3. Lighter eye colors

1598062994709.png


About 8 thousand years ago some random guy was born with a random mutation that gave him blue eyes.

That one guy’s SMV was so high that the trait spread all over Europe faster than the dark plague. To the point where in many northern European countries virtually EVERYONE has that trait.

This can mean one of two things:

The trait offered a significant survival advantage or the trait offered a significant advantage in sexual selection. I think it's pretty obvious what it was seeing that eskimos can see perfectly well in the arctic. It was considered more attractive. Blue eyes had never existed prior to that, and brown eyes were all people had ever been exposed to, yet it was still considered far more attractive.

If you think about it, it's pretty obvious, blue is most favorite color overall:

View attachment 880011
It's not established that we share one blue eyed ancestor. That's just a popular narrative in order to suppress whiteness and push the narrative that we are all niggers.
 
Coping bullshit
 
  • +1
Reactions: DharkDC
white traits are coincidentally the most polar opposite of characteristics of syndromatic person, take this example
1610124739588


high nasal bridge
no epicanthal folds
long pfl
forward midface
short philtrum
strong chin

these are white traits and coincidentally polar opposite of what we perceive / subconciously detect what a person with impaired dna looks like

there is no good looking normal and ugly, only normal slightly ugly and deform/ syndromatic
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 9090, TheChosenChad, thecel and 1 other person
white traits are coincidentally the most polar opposite of characteristics of syndromatic person, take this example
View attachment 917860

high nasal bridge
no epicanthal folds
long pfl
forward midface
short philtrum
strong chin

these are white traits and coincidentally polar opposite of what we perceive / subconciously detect what a person with impaired dna looks like

there is no good looking normal and ugly, only normal slightly ugly and deform/ syndromatic
Thin upper lip is an exception tbh but the point still stands
 
  • +1
Reactions: maxlooks

Similar threads

B
Replies
4
Views
165
hytt
H
M
Replies
30
Views
964
sub4 iranicel
sub4 iranicel
chief detectiveman
Replies
10
Views
332
CarrotMaxxer
CarrotMaxxer
coispet
Replies
24
Views
772
barettrealrx
barettrealrx
Valloittaja
Replies
36
Views
413
longjohnmong
longjohnmong

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top