Black Women are uglier?

[safado]

HBDer

What's that? Never heard the term (real question not sarcasm)

Attractivness and attraction are impossible to measure. Standards change dramatically between era's. Look at the Renaissance depictions of Aphrodite, she was chubby. That was the Renaiisance imagiing of the ideal female form. Standards have changed throughout history and I think a hot blonde girl withhue fake tits would be strange to peole of that era. You can find tribes all ove the world today that find one race ugly, whereas the rest of the world considers said person devastati9ngly beautifu etc.....


If you want to measurte something palpable physcially - look at the Olympics

Check out all the purely athletic sports - short distance running, middle distance, marathons, Olympic Lifting, Powerlifting, swimming and look who consistently comes out on top

The 100 yard dash is almost entirely black

Central African marathon runners are on another level

Powerlfiting and Olympic lifting are all Eastern European and Nordic white men with higher bodyfat on average.

Male gymnastics - I don't knoww actually -

swimming - all white

It's simple actually. Slow twitch and fast twitch muscle fibersd create bodies better for certain athletic activities. Keep in mind this is purely atheltic. It's not boxing where skill, heart etc... are factors.

It seems that Central African runners have a lot more slow twitch muscle fibers than most people
Black sprinters have a tendon and ligament structure that is likely more explosive and loaded with actionable fast twitch fibers. Sprinters are usually tall and tribes like the Masaii and other areads of Africa have generally taller black males, with better bone structure for sprinting

Slavic, Germanic and Nordic whites usually have more fast twitch myscle fibers and thicker bone desnity for powerlfiting and strongman competiton - although even here body type will make a difference

Olympic lifters have short toros and longer arms. Great Benchpressers and squatters have short arms and legs. Great deadliftersd have long arms and a high torso. That's more typical of a cold weather white an's build. The body stores more fat because those areas are cold. People are bigger and burlier on average and the talent pool is larger. Their5 are exceptions. Mark Henry was an extraordinary black lifter and their have been some white marathoners. On average, those activities have as LOT to do with your physical makeup. At the top 1% a few muscle finbers make a difference.


As far as beauty, intelligence, whatever - I don't think that's genetic or even measurable. You don't see many black inventors or entrepeneurs before the 1950's. After black men were tiven more (still not 100% equal) opportunity to copete aainst whites - black guys did just as well if not better in entrepeneurship, science - whichever. As far as black women - my wife gets mad because I have a thing for black women - I think they're beautiful. The best prgrammer I've ever known is black. The only measurable thing I can see is in things like the Olympcs - where their are quantifiable answers. i LOVE black women. Love Asian women too - Middle Eastern women and Russian women - man. I am however married so its all relagatedto the FAP bank

Lomg story short - I'd point to culture and circumstance in most of these factors. Things like bone and muscle strucure can be measured and that's what I've seen so far. I could be wrong

[Pillow Biter]

"Attractivness and attraction are impossible to measure. Standards change dramatically between era's. Look at the Renaissance depictions of Aphrodite, she was chubby. That was the Renaiisance imagiing of the ideal female form. Standards have changed throughout history and I think a hot blonde girl withhue fake tits would be strange to peole of that era. You can find tribes all ove the world today that find one race ugly, whereas the rest of the world considers said person devastati9ngly beautifu etc....."

You raise some good points.  But the blanket statement that attractiveness is impossible to measure is just too strong.  We don't know that for sure.  We may be able to measure some elments of AVERAGE attractiveness.  Some thinks might be culture neutral, other things might have to be measured within a given cultural context.  No doubt some individuals will have feelings that differ greatly from the average.  The poit is that science might have SOMETHINg to say on the topic - even if it won't be the final word.  It is premature to just say that science has no place in the conversation.

[Tenuto]

"HBD (Human Bio Diversity) is the study of the differences in the talents, abilities and IQ in different races. It is sometimes used to justify racial views. There is probably some validity, but it often taken too far."

Quoting some random schlub from a google result. My first guess was "Heterogeneous BreeDer."

[safado]

hahaha, thanks Tenuto

well PB, I gotta say that I disagree. I think this is a subject for anthropology and the cultural standards of beauty more so than measuring people's cheekbones. I also think that sexual attraction is absolutely related to social factors. You ever seea gorgeuos girl with a schlubby guy in a 200,000$ car. Their is a reason. Women are more likely to feel attraction based on non-physcial factors and like it or not, I've had friends f different ethnicities who simply couldn't find another racial group attractive. One Filipino buddy whp said he just couldn't finds white women attractive. In Jamaica, people try to bleach their skin white to become more attractive. Here in Brazil, people are SHOCKINGLY uninterested in tits relatively. The guys here love booty. Im not saying subtlly either. A woman will et downright hostile if you tell her she's skinny and her ass looks thinner. Girl's will get ass implants on layaway (not kidding) before boob jobs. Fake boobs here are kind of meh.......

I see where you're coming from but, I just disagree.

[Tony XerxēsTWD Stark]

Fake breasts from Brazil tend to look like garbage on models I've seen. I like it when a woman's body has some balance, and if they have a big ass with great shape and no chest, they all seem to automatically jump to a D-cup.

[Pillow Biter]

Safado, you are the one making the extreme statement that science has NOTHING to say about attractiveness.  All of your points are still consistent with the idea that science may have SOMETHING to add to the discussion.

[safado]

No, I'm saying that more than a measurable hard science, measuring symmetries and proprotions; I take as more of a social science which will factor in the societies standard's of beauty - like anthropology. Science can meausure physical performances over races, but it isn't as proficient at measuring things that have social factors. Anthropology is a science, it's not a lab coat and microscope science.

[Pillow Biter]

I see your point.  We have to be careful of not tripping over semantics.  So to be more precise, I would argue that it is premature to say that EMPIRICAL science has NOTHING to add to a conversation about attractiveness.  Again, I agree with you empirical science is likely to have more problems with this area than others.  No question.  But just ruling it out from the get go seems wrong-headed. 

[safado]

Well, ok. I usually run into this problem when I discuss my opinions on God. If you ask 20 people in a room if they believe in God usually most will claim to be atheists. If you then ask them what is their definition of God they have 20 different explanations; most ruling out the wrathful , smite and sulfur God of the New testament. If pressed you will usually find either a hopeful agnosticvism or a rleluctant belief that their is "something," but an absolute unwillingness to say it. I believe in God but my own definition of God is absolutely unlike anything that I could explain in 20-30 minutes or less if that...

   So yeah, I think science can have something to say. I also believe science can have something to say on the nature of God. I'm a bit of an excption though as I don't make a personal distinction between science and the nature of somewhat ambigfuous things. I see science as a scalpel to wortk out the fine print that the humanities has to mold. In this case I think the appropriate science is anthropology and even history - I'm curious to see wht the survival standards of different era's meant in terms of realtive standards of beauty.

  Fat women in lean times meant success - in 1600's France I amogine that a little junk in the trunk might mean a different standard of beauty. I see you're point but I think the priority on which science is appropriate and what iformation should mbe mixed togehter is as important.

BTW, its about 4 AM and I'm working all night so I'm rambling. If I said anything dumb please disregard

[Primetime]

These women probably fit the most common general complexion and physical type among African Americans.  Does anyone consider any of them to be unattractive?

Also, 'science' has determined that all men prefer fuller lips, higher cheekbones and wider smiles on women.  These are characteristics common to black women. 

[safado]

I'd give any of those ladies the best 13 seconds of her life

[Tenuto]

Well, ok. I usually run into this problem when I discuss my opinions on God. If you ask 20 people in a room if they believe in God usually most will claim to be atheists.

What kind of atheist paradise is this? If you claim to be an atheist in Oklahoma you'll get lynched and sent to hell as soon as you can say "just kidding."

[safado]

Anyplace where the prevailing faux-intellectual view is to cut any tie's with organized religion and create distance in order to demonstrate that one is evolved and not associated with such intellectual throwbacks as the religious.

I addmittedly disagree with virtually all organized religion with the exception of the usual gnostic faith you usually find in the early parts of a religion's births as well as the usual mystical channels usually written somewhere along the line........

Go ahead and put up a thread on the existence of God and people will freak the hell out. People will insinuate that if you believe in God you must be ridiculous and people will steal away information to send to Bill Maher - for religulous the documentary part 2. Try talking about faith in any University - people will also lose their minds - at least in the US Northeast - it's usually a sign of intellectual feebleness.

   Most people, when pressed, will display some sort of spiritual worldview that looks more like an optmistic agnosticism whch is another way of saying " organized religion disappointed me but I still believe in something I just don't how to describe it and what to call it." True hard core atheists - like Superlurker, are usually so hard-core about atheism that when you put all of the atheists together they always form a set of precepts, codes of morality, and world views that pretty much shape up to be a religion - albeit worshipping their lack of faith tio the point where they will onçly accept divine evidence in the frm of a controlled labratory experiment - with finding that find the Hubble telescope pointing out to them a mesage written in stars saying "I am God you can all rest easy" - and then they would further argue that it was a hoax. Their atheism is so harcore that I find it to be equally as hardheaded as the ultra-orthodox of any religion.

[Tenuto]

The only guy I ever really talked to about his atheism said he was raised a Christian until his mom died of cancer, and his logic stated that if an omnibenevolent, omnipowerful God existed, he wouldn't have let his mom die. That can't really be called water-tight reasoning. So 100% of atheists I've talked to have a chip on their shoulder to hate on the very existence of God.

As for me, I don't fit your description of an 'optimistic' agnostic. While I am disappointed in organized religion, I also only accept the possible existence of God because its existence can't be disproven. Therefore I will be agnostic until all the mysteries of the universe are discovered and scientifically annul any possible argument for God's existence in a logically sound manner. Or until God is scientifically discovered to be real beyond any reasonable doubt. Both seem unlikely to happen ever, but if I had to place a bet it'd be that there is no God or higher consciousness pulling the strings behind the workings of the cosmos or whatever.

As for your view on hardcore atheists worshiping atheism; I think it's kind of unavoidable for people who have put a lot of thought into the universe they live in and what kind of role they play in it without the presence of some objectively divine set of rules to define their behavior. The absence of God in the mind forces them to justify their actions according to their own logical process. This requires much more introspection and thought than "God said not to kill people. God is good so killing must be bad, so I'm not gonna do it."

Therefore atheism is as much of a core pillar of an atheist person's morality as religion is for a theist. To speak on behalf of atheism to justify their morality (and by extension everything they do) is not worship, it's merely giving proper due to a central tenet of their existence.

Unless your talking about those Starbucks drinking, iPad buying, pseudo-intellectual hipsters that claim atheism because it's their way of being totally cool and rebelling against perceived societal norms. Fuck those guys.

[safado]

I'm mostly referring to those Starbucks guys - and by extension - those are the people I went to University with.

You also described something I mentioned earlier on in the post. Your definition of God is very close to the issue I stated above - 20 disagreeing on a definition of God.

  IMO, the fact that to begin with God has to be a directly interfering force that governs universal action and morality goes against my own personal definition of deity. I'm probably closer to what Phil K Dick describes himself as (i'll look up the term later) except I'm Israeli/Jewish. My own view is closer to mystical Judaism and KAballic studies than anything people really talk about in a synagogue.

    You'd probably fit closer to my definition of a pessimistic agnostic. You want to believe, you can't find coimpelling evidence, and reluctantly you're waiting to find out anbd you fear or expect that it isn't what you hope it will be.. IOW - I think your image of God isn't compatible with what you see in the world.

   I was like that when I was diagnosed with diabetes. I lost all faith in God because I felt like a failed piece of biology. Every time I tried to see something beautiful all I could see was the harsh reality of my failed endocrinologivcal system. I was already on my road to wanting to be a professional fighter at that point (I don't know if you know that I'm in Brazil or what I'm doing here) but as time went on and I looked more and more into it - my faith came back in a very unexpected way.

   I studied everything their was about divinity and the resulting search turned up a worldview that changedf my idea of what  God is and could be and I started to accept some of the limiutations of human ability and constant conversations with like-minded people; some of who were staunch and convincing atheists some not at all, and came to the conclusion that their is life after death  and that God exists but that my interpetation of God and life after death was what was wrong in the first place.

   After that, my next and current questions are what is the nature of God and w2hat kinds of science and existing evidence is there. I've found a lot of compelling things and I'm working on more of them right now. Some are well-documented ideas and some are nutty.

   For an example of nutty here is something. I just finished reading a book by Michio kaku about string theory. He talks at length about mathematical proofs of higher dimensional physics and string theory. This is a very well-studied and horribly understoiood theory of physics stating that higher dimensions and properties of the universe exist in higher vibtrational patterns and frequencies. It's a weird theory because people describe at looking at the mathematical proofs of an equation without knowing what  the question was.
 
   It did make me question though, if theior isn't a possibility that information can't be written in some sort of quantum form directly into the fabric of space-time. After all, Einstein gave spacve time as the 4th dimension, therefore eexplaining gravity and just about everythinbg else that can be experimentally proven and quantum mechanics provides plenty of evidencce for  free will and more - than God isn't the ghost in the machine - the ghost is the machine and everything else that exists except that every machine is aware of itself.

    So if DNA is orderly written so that 6 proteins contain the written markers and instructions for all of our existence - maybe the universe itself could contain some clues to the nature of life. We don't even know what matter is made of. I sometimes wonder if the universe couldn't hold a dna code so to speak, written somewhere in all the cords, particles and vibrations?

 It isn't the basis for my belief - it's just a nutty idea - but I want to learn more.

Anyhow my origgnal point being - I don't recall very well but something along the lines of divinity right??? It leads you to strange places

[Mightily Oats]

These women probably fit the most common general complexion and physical type among African Americans.  Does anyone consider any of them to be unattractive?

Also, 'science' has determined that all men prefer fuller lips, higher cheekbones and wider smiles on women.  These are characteristics common to black women. 

Hahahaha posting mixed race broads as proof.

Yah, that sounds about right.

[Tony XerxēsTWD Stark]

Are you seriously arguing that high cheekbones and full lips aren't african physical characteristics?

[Mightily Oats]

No.

How could you even get that from what I said?

He's using examples of women who clearly aren't 100% African to prove his point.

And yes I'm aware of blah blah blah how many full blooded ones can we expect to have pictures of tee hee.

Also aware that asking for 100%, LITERALLY, is silly, but you still understand my objection by now I should hope.

[maizeblue]

No.

How could you even get that from what I said?

He's using examples of women who clearly aren't 100% African to prove his point.

And yes I'm aware of blah blah blah how many full blooded ones can we expect to have pictures of tee hee.

Also aware that asking for 100%, LITERALLY, is silly, but you still understand my objection by now I should hope.

But the same could be said for most caucasian people, which is why the classifications for "race" are retarded. By American standards, which all of those women are, they would be classified as Black/African American, not mixed.

[Tony XerxēsTWD Stark]

No.

How could you even get that from what I said?

He's using examples of women who clearly aren't 100% African to prove his point.

Clearly aren't 100% African? I love how you try to disqualify factual evidence with a joke and pretend that facts aren't facts. Those are women of primarily African descent and physical traits. If you have some sort of genetic evidence that proves otherwise, then by all means, feel free to post a link of some kind.

[Tenuto]

  You'd probably fit closer to my definition of a pessimistic agnostic. You want to believe, you can't find coimpelling evidence, and reluctantly you're waiting to find out anbd you fear or expect that it isn't what you hope it will be.. IOW - I think your image of God isn't compatible with what you see in the world.

I want to believe in a God? How do you figure that?

These women probably fit the most common general complexion and physical type among African Americans.  Does anyone consider any of them to be unattractive?

Also, 'science' has determined that all men prefer fuller lips, higher cheekbones and wider smiles on women.  These are characteristics common to black women.

All those qualities you mention are covered by such dark brown skin, though. I mean really. It's brown. Ew.

[safado]

Well..........My gut feeling is that people want to know that life means something and that their is order in some way shape or form.

     People usually look to their idea of God as taught to them, and slowly become disillusioned as reality versus what you are taughtas a child becomes obvious  - "if you want something hard enough pray for it." The first life tragedy that follows, real tragedy demonstrates that you prayed but it happened anyway.

  What usuually follows is a belief that it must all be fake. Since religions are strong on good behavior or go to hell than God becomes a merciless tyrant. Why worship a God who orders you to pray and do good deeds or he'll sentence you to eternity in hell if you prayed to him so that the dog wouldn't die and Sparky is gone anyway?

   Moving away from religion becomes liberating in that case. The result is that people's internal spiritual lives go downhill as well. As God is seens as impossibility, the result is a difficulty in feeling connected to anything beyond a cold, mechanical universe running like clockwork. Isaac Newton, a very religious man, described and wartned against this when he described gravity and has stretched back in time as far as Pythagoras (saying the same thing)

   So that's what i've usually seen. People want their t be meaning, but they can't reconcile their want for meaning and the indifferent world around them

[Primetime]

I guess I have to go straight to Africa.

Nigeria





Kenya:






Uganda:



Somewhere in Africa:




Anyone view any of these women as unattractive?

[safado]

ebony goddesses!!!!!!

[Primetime]

To me, this woman is attactive.  No evidence of any mixture.

[Pillow Biter]

LOL I guess this is the debate board and people want to debate something...regardless of irritating details like say the topic at hand or the truth.  In any event no one and no science would ever deny that there are some beautiful black women out there - mixed or "pure" blooded.  That was never the point at hand.

But looking at those gorgeous pics, I'm starting to care less about one kind of point in hand, and more about another

[fangirl101]

I see more black men with white women then black men with black women.

No. Just no.

[Dampyre]

Black people vary in appearance more than any other race on Earth. That fact alone makes this another dumb post by the Pillow fellow. This guy wants to be a part of some 'superior race' in order to validate is own ego.

[Rufio]

Black people vary in appearance more than any other race on Earth.

 How do you figure that? I always considered Europeans to vary the most, simply due to their range of hair and eye colors.

[AliceRunsThingsSon]

How do you figure that? I always considered Europeans to vary the most, simply due to their range of hair and eye colors.

Asians vary the most IMO, but that's for the same reason that blacks and hispanics vary so much - history of European rapage.  Without the European schlong invasion maybe white folks would have the most variety.

[Tony XerxēsTWD Stark]

How do you figure that? I always considered Europeans to vary the most, simply due to their range of hair and eye colors.

There was a study done a while back and it concluded that there were more variations in facial features for black people than any other group. They did not have more variations in eye or hair colors.

[Tenuto]

Black people vary in appearance more than any other race on Earth. That fact alone makes this another dumb post by the Pillow fellow. This guy wants to be a part of some 'superior race' in order to validate is own ego.

That's ridiculous. Everyone knows that all black people look alike.

[Vanguard]

Mixed breeds like Beyonce are gravy

Beyonce is all black genius. Her mom is creole, and her dad is black.

*shrug* Still treat everyone the same.

Don't pull a muscle patting yourself on the back.

[Panthergod]

Asians vary the most IMO, but that's for the same reason that blacks and hispanics vary so much - history of European rapage.  Without the European schlong invasion maybe white folks would have the most variety.

No it's because all phenotypes originate with us.

[Ghost of glutton, son.]

Beauty isn't an objectively measurable trait.

[Supeprime]

This entire study is nonsense. "Attractiveness" is at BEST relative. And can depend on any number of factors, starting with personal preference, and including things like cultural stimuli.

No study like this could/should ever be taken seriously.

[IamtheRock3]

No.

How could you even get that from what I said?

He's using examples of women who clearly aren't 100% African to prove his point.

And yes I'm aware of blah blah blah how many full blooded ones can we expect to have pictures of tee hee.

Also aware that asking for 100%, LITERALLY, is silly, but you still understand my objection by now I should hope.

You have a tough time finding ANY woman in American that a 100 percent African...ugly or hot

We came from slaves

People tended to FUCK thier slaves

I mean we all have last names of white people for a reason

Brown is not a name the generated in Africa

[Nox]

This entire study is nonsense. "Attractiveness" is at BEST relative. And can depend on any number of factors, starting with personal preference, and including things like cultural stimuli.

No study like this could/should ever be taken seriously.

You say no to ratchet pussy, Juicy J can't.