[killJOY]

AT LAST, THE PINNACLE OF EUROPHILE WHITENESS!

The creme de la creme!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juOQhTuzDQ0

"Ah thot yurrup wuz a cuntry."

[dinopello]

Finally!

Yellowman, the African Albino. King Yellowman, King of Dancehall Reggae. You bring that.



A little sample!!!

[jasonraymondson]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', 'h')ow about white animals?

[BigTex]

Wasn't there a James Bond movie in which the villain had an albino on his goon squad? If I am remembering correctly, then I appreciate him.

[Kingcoal]

I like dark skin. That being said, I'll warn you that the following is very politically incorrect.

White skin was an adaptation to the lack of sunshine and vitamin D in Europe. Europeans are descended from dark skinned Ethiopians who crossed over into the Middle East and went northward. As they moved into colder climes, they wore more clothing. In Africa, these people were used to a diet consisting mainly of shellfish. Shellfish is very rich in vitamin D. They were also used to hellishly warm temperatures, thus they wore minimal clothing in Africa. With a diet rich in vitamin D and plenty of sunshine on their skin to produce the vitamin, their bodies were adapted, like so many other bloodlines in Africa, to the environment with dark skin to protect them from UV rays.

As they wore more clothing and ate a diet poor in vitamin D, they developed conditions typical of a person starving for vitamin D. In other words, they tended to be sickly. Sickly people are unattractive. People born with lighter skin tended to be less sickly because their skin let in more UV so as to make vitamin D. Less sickly people are more attractive, thus they get laid more and produce more children. Eventually, these tribes lost almost all their dark skin color. White skin was an adaptation to the environment; however, it produced a race of people who tend to prefer light skin over dark. Evolution is not politically correct. Whatever survives and reproduces the most, wins. Most white people don't know why they like white skin, they just do; it's in their genes. It's called social biology and it's what shapes human behavior. These northern European tribes had it hard, very hard. They had to store food and wood for the long winter, thus breeding into them a strong instinct to plan ahead and resist the natural desire for instant gratification. I think you know where I'm going with this. Are whites superior? By certain definitions, they tend to have inbreed traits which lead to being able to dominate other tribes who don't have those traits. Zardaz is correct that Europeans have had a lot of wars, but that really doesn't say anything other than that Europeans DOCUMENTED their trials and tribulations, which leads back to those traits I'm talking about. It takes a lot of resources to make war, which requires a lot of advance planning, etc.

Modern Africans retain their dark skin for good reason. They too exhibit vitamin D deficiency social biological traits. Most Africans didn't have access to vitamin D rich foods either, but they have a very warm environment, thus bearing skin in the sun is how they evolved their way of getting this important vitamin. The sun is so strong in most of these regions that human skin cells can produce D and retain their protective coloring.

When modern Europeans came back to meet their distant relatives, they considered them savage because they wore little clothing. You have to remember that Europeans, subjected to the brutal dictatorship of evolution, had developed an unconscious distaste for dark skin.

If you want to blame subliminal racism on anything, blame it on evolution. Most white people who exhibit it are just mindlessly following their instincts. Of course, smarter white people can balance their instincts with reason.

I'm white, but I'm attracted to darker skinned women for some reason I don't know. I have a lot of experience with black women and I could tell a lot of stories that would be even more politically incorrect. I'm going to vote for Obama, if that tells you anything. You see, the thing is, racism is blind instinct and like I said, smart people - no matter what their ethnicity, can reason through it. That's what makes humans so adaptable; we have the brain capacity to act in our own best interest regardless of what our instincts tell us.

In my opinion, whites are superior warriors; I think that history bears that out painfully well. That doesn't make whites superior, but it does tend to put them in charge. I like what I hear from Obama, he is a breath of fresh air and I think that his presidency would lead to more peaceful solutions to many of the problems out there. Face it; we don't have any security threats from Europeans anymore. Different times require different strategies. That's why we need to keep the human gene pool as diverse as possible. What makes the best family dog? A mutt; because mutts have a variety of behavioral characteristics to draw from. Humans need to intermarry more and diversify their own local gene pools. It makes for more adaptable humans.

[killJOY]

I find this interesting, not "politically correct" at all.

But then I'm used to embracing unpleasant truths.

[Kingcoal]

I think it all started with yeast which is white in it's purest state:
link

[Roy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')inally!

Yellowman, the African Albino. King Yellowman, King of Dancehall Reggae. You bring that.

[Narz]

[I_Like_Plants]

The whitest people I have ever seen are Koreans and city Japanese. If they shaved their heads, since their hair is black, they'd be some really WHITE people.

[dorlomin]

bugger, my responce was eaten by the machine.

[BigTex]

Here we go:

[Micki]

Didn't arians come from India not Ethiopia????

[Arkwright]

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/

Blogs probaply from asian-american perspective about stereoptypical cultural traits of white people. One could question would those issues be described better as class attitudes or particulary american attitudes, or in some cases universal values.

But as someone there commented:
"Seems by seems pretty good to be white, all in all. the list of predictable behaviors seems to include a lot of exercise, consideration for others, and attempted appreciation and respect for art. As far as stereotypes go, that’s pretty sweet."

I personally thank the caucasian Cavalli-Sforza genetic cluster for great architecture and the enlightement movement, may your cultures wise up again and let there still be light skinned people centuries from now.

[Micki]

Arkwright, would you have any details on the Finnish DNA clusters?
I've always considered the finns being the asians of europe.

The olderst known history of the finns goes back to the time they were on the other side of the Ural mountains.
There is some evidence of finns mixing with huns, who were a racially diverce bunch.

This is further supported by the fact that Attilla and his huns spent a fair bit of time in Hungary and Finnish language is remotely related to Hungarian.

Many finns however have high cheekbones (common Mongolean and Chinese feature) and somewhat slid eyes are a reasonably common feature.
Melancolic mentality seems somewhat different from most of the Europeans, especially the neighbours the Swedes.

Add to this linguistic connection to Japanese and Korean languages and you might quite fairly conclude that finns whiteness probably only is skin deep.

[Arkwright]

You got it kinda right. A genetic marker (Y-DNA N-haplo) is common here and with some asian groups. We came from east 10 000 - 20 000 years back, and by theory Finns got as far as to central Europe and then retreated back to northeast as Germanic tribes came around. During that time there has been lots of mixing around, especially with swedes. Samis are different but but related.
The linquiestic theories are on shallower ground as they are harder to trace, but currently Finnish language is linked to some root language around Ural and Siberia. Theories on these topics have changed much within few decades, and I dont think consensus has yet been reached.

But on the subject of whiteness - as in how we are placed in relation of large genetic clusters and to what we relate most, I do not know. Probaply well in between. On cultural viewpoint Finnish history is European.

Edit: map of genegroups:
http://www.dnaheritage.com/ysnptree.asp

[eastbay]

Micki,

Finns are a bit different from the Lapps, who live in the north. My ancestry is Lapp, so this has always interested me.

Wiki claims Lapps are related to Berbers genetically, but from their faces it seems they're more Mongol in appearance.

If anyone wants some interesting reading google Lapp or Sami. These are Europeans who really aren't, well, European.

[Micki]

I know, it was Arkwright who claimed they were related.
To my knowledge the background of the Sami's (pls don't say Lapp's it is an imperialist term in their opinion) is pretty much unknown. Their culture and religion differs from pagan Finnish and Norse but all the ones I've seen have been pale like Finns after a 10month winter, so I would be very surprised to learn of any genetical links to berbers.

I am myself by the way born in northen Finland, in case any of you wondered.

[eastbay]

Micki,

Oulu is where my grandparents are from. Dark brown hair, brown eyes all of them. Short and husky.

I'm Lapp, and I know it means approximately, 'outsider', and I have no trouble with the term, really. Sami may be nicer, but I have no problem with either.

The Berber thing was on Wiki and it's the first time I had ever heard it... so I question it too. I had hear years ago that we're related to Basques... but I can't find references to it. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough.

[Micki]

Kiva tavata Eastbay (How is your finnish?).
Ja terve Arkwrightille.
I'm from Kemi myself.
Spent quite a lot of school holidays there but mainly grew up in Stockholm. Now Aussie since 12 years.
So you live near Portland??? Pacific NW looks like a nice place but to be honest, I don't miss the cold winters at all.