Blackpill White women age like total garbage

Alexanderr

Alexanderr

Mod
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Posts
13,044
Reputation
17,334
Time online
130d 14h 35m
It’s true unless they use a consistent, effective skin care regime, they’ll usually start looking like ass early. There’s a reason for this though.
 
Won'tStopNoodling

Won'tStopNoodling

Retired
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Posts
10,386
Reputation
14,110
Time online
52d 7h 57m
What's this obsession with white women that niggas have? I'll never understand
 
Blackout.xl

Blackout.xl

Retired.
Joined
Sep 13, 2019
Posts
22,637
Reputation
44,229
Time online
165d 14h 42m
Never once, did I materially disagree with the above, highlighted. If you are going to argue then dont misrepresent my argument.

You originally said 'White people as a whole have less sun resistant skin + lower collagen production compared to ethnics due to a lack of melanin'

From this you are making an ASSUMPTION that a white person is going to be OVEREXPOSED to RADIATION due to their - and i quote you - 'less sun resistant skin', thereby suffering skin damage due to melanin issues. YOU introduced this issue by implication of your original statement. DONT be intellectual disingenuous.

In response, I implied that whatever initial benefit can be derived from a lack of melanin is rendered null by other factors like protruding bones and an assortment of other factors like whether this hypothetical white person lives in a colder or warmer client.

As for your your most recent response, regarding female attractiveness being 'not based' around bones. Again, when did I say this in substance? I brought up BONES as a tempering argument to your original contention - a factor that you missed.

Notwithstanding that,
much money is spent on PLASTIC SURGERY in the form of OSTEOTOMIES (if they are poor, fillers to give the illusion of protruding bones). Your perception of looks is only half right.

Beauty isnt derived from a melted face with lots of collagen. Bones are as part of the faction of looks as bones are. You substantively miss this point in all of your analysis.
Read, still an incredibly retarded comment.

Once again, no one mentioned anyone being overexposed to radiation. What was mentioned was the impact of sunlight on skin, which happens regardless of environment outside of extreme cases (such as winters in Siberia).

Unless you stay inside 24/7 or wear sunscreen all the time this process can’t be avoided. The sun is beneficial for overall health anyway.

The context of the conversation was based around white women. Not white people as a whole. Bones can make up for collagen in terms of a white mans attractiveness, as robust and sharp bones are inherently masculine and can potentially override collagen falio for a MAN.

This cannot be said for a woman, as a woman’s attractiveness is purely based on neoteny, femininity, etc. Which furthermore is based on the appearance of ones skin in terms of brightness and youthfulness.

Ones a woman’s skin goes, most of her SMV is gone. Sharp bones on a female with saggy skin will look gross to most men, not attractive. Men on average are attracted to feminine women over masculine women anyway and masculine women seen as attractive almost always have Top tier skin.

You obviously didn’t read any of what I said and it shows. Again, this conversation is about WOMEN. Not both genders.

Learn to read next time. You’re still autistic as shit after spending nearly a year off this site. Over for your life
 
sub6manletnozygos

sub6manletnozygos

Zephir
Joined
Nov 19, 2019
Posts
2,604
Reputation
3,401
Time online
28d 8h 28m
@Blackout.xl
>'no one mentioned anyone being overexposed to radiation. What was mentioned was the impact of sunlight on skin'
i dont understand how you can distinguish these two sentences when considered in relation to my original statement which was based on LEVELS OF RADIATION affecting skin.

> 'Unless you stay inside 24/7 or wear sunscreen all the time this process can’t be avoided'
UV damage to the skin cant be avoided but it can be substantially minimized depending on location, sunscreen and clothes, the most important factor being location. the impact of UV RADIATION on skin MATERIALLY differs in impact depending on the UV index, which is a product of where you are located in the world.

White people in northern climates have whiter skin and are more susceptible to UV rays. Thus, if they were in the north and therefore subject to far less UV light it is unreasonable for you to posit that '99%' of white women age like shit. After all, your intellectually dishonest generalizations could be applied not to white women, but hypothetical colored women living in the northern climate who would be much more susceptible to suffering from extreme vitamin d deficiency and related skin diseases like PSORIASIS and ATOPIC DERMATITIS.

The point I am making is that the particular genotypic susceptibility of aging is as much a product of location and external habits as it is of collagen and elastin levels. Skin is an expression of biological adaptations which serve to temper your aforemention generalizations against all white women. Darker skin is an adaptation to prevent skin damage due to the sunny African climate, is it not? The converse is true for white people in the north is it not?

I maintain everything that I have already said in previous replies. Nothing you have said above rebuts what i have said.


> 'the context of the conversation was based around white women. Not white people as a whole'
where in my previous response did i explicitly say or at least imply that this wasnt the case? I have only been talking about women. Did you not read my response?

>Bones can make up for collagen in terms of a white mans attractiveness...This cannot be said for a woman, as a woman’s attractiveness is purely based on neoteny...Ones a woman’s skin goes, most of her SMV is gone'

I originally objected to and continue to object to your assertion of femininity being 'SOLEY' an expression of high levels of collagen and elastin. You seem to be struggling with the concept of range and variables. This isnt a black or white function with one input as you put it ('solely'). Bones clearly play an important function and as I originally said in my ORIGINAL comment, various factors like location, bones, diet, cortisol all play an important function to the aging process of white women - the original topic of the thread.

Thus, how can you reconcile your original, intellectually dishonest comment with my comments that simply provide other material consideration which influence this aging process?

Don't forget that my response was in relation to you saying white women 'age like milk 99% of the time' which is intellectually dishonest, racist and hypocritical.


> 'Learn to read next time'
jfl at your sanctimonious aspersions. I can say the exact same thing as you with regard to everything you have said in counter to what i have said. you have a myopic conception of the aging process of human being.

> You’re still autistic as shit
yes
 
Last edited:
Blackout.xl

Blackout.xl

Retired.
Joined
Sep 13, 2019
Posts
22,637
Reputation
44,229
Time online
165d 14h 42m
@Blackout.xl
>'no one mentioned anyone being overexposed to radiation. What was mentioned was the impact of sunlight on skin'
i dont understand how you can distinguish these two sentences when considered in relation to my original statement which was based on LEVELS OF RADIATION affecting skin.

> 'Unless you stay inside 24/7 or wear sunscreen all the time this process can’t be avoided'
UV damage to the skin cant be avoided but it can be substantially minimized depending on location, sunscreen and clothes, the most important factor being location. the impact of UV RADIATION on skin MATERIALLY differs in impact depending on the UV index, which is a product of where you are located in the world.

White people in northern climates have whiter skin and are more susceptible to UV rays. Thus, if they were in the north and therefore subject to far less UV light it is unreasonable for you to posit that '99%' of white women age like shit. After all, your intellectually dishonest generalizations could be applied not to white women, but hypothetical colored women living in the northern climate who would be much more susceptible to suffering from extreme vitamin d deficiency and related skin diseases like PSORIASIS and ATOPIC DERMATITIS.

The point I am making is that the particular genotypic susceptibility of aging is as much a product of location and external habits as it is of collagen and elastin levels. Skin is an expression of biological adaptations which serve to temper your aforemention generalizations against all white women. Darker skin is an adaptation to prevent skin damage due to the sunny African climate, is it not? The converse is true for white people in the north is it not?

I maintain everything that I have already said in previous replies. Nothing you have said above rebuts what i have said.


> 'the context of the conversation was based around white women. Not white people as a whole'
where in my previous response did i explicitly say or at least imply that this wasnt the case? I have only been talking about women. Did you not read my response?

>Bones can make up for collagen in terms of a white mans attractiveness...This cannot be said for a woman, as a woman’s attractiveness is purely based on neoteny...Ones a woman’s skin goes, most of her SMV is gone'

I originally objected to and continue to object to your assertion of femininity being 'SOLEY' an expression of high levels of collagen and elastin. You seem to be struggling with the concept of range and variables. This isnt a black or white function with one input as you put it ('solely'). Bones clearly play an important function and as I originally said in my ORIGINAL comment, various factors like location, bones, diet, cortisol all play an important function to the aging process of white women - the original topic of the thread.

Thus, how can you reconcile your original, intellectually dishonest comment with my comments that simply provide other material consideration which influence this aging process?

Don't forget that my response was in relation to you saying white women 'age like milk 99% of the time' which is intellectually dishonest, racist and hypocritical.


> 'Learn to read next time'
jfl at your sanctimonious aspersions. I can say the exact same thing as you with regard to everything you have said in counter to what i have said. you have a myopic conception of the aging process of human being.

> You’re still autistic as shit
yes
Not reading your shitty essay ngl
 
TITUS

TITUS

Zephir
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Posts
3,552
Reputation
2,751
Time online
18d 12h 39m
Infertile women just make dicks fall off, and they become infertile pretty damn fast, don't bother with women over 30.
 
TheLurch

TheLurch

MixedCurryPrettyboy
Joined
Nov 9, 2020
Posts
935
Reputation
1,786
Time online
8d 23m
White women collagen is a joke, more than half the white girls I know could pass as 25-30yrs old while they're 20-22 meanwhile the ones with good collagen (asian, black, indian etc) look the exact same since 16
 
Similar threads
Thread starter Title Forum Replies Date
L JFL Asian women prefer black men to white men Offtopic 38
magnificentcel Serious White women are so cute Offtopic 28
Yliaster White Women Virtue Signal The Most Offtopic 6

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Top