itt I would like to discuss the question if fair skin is cross-culturally

>>78745587
Well argued
You are correct :)
Except I think the rarity factor only plays a role in environments where they are actually rare.
You kind of subjectively see the world as an expansion of your surroundings. To us in Switzerland, South American and other "exotic" girls are interesting because they're not common, so that argument works both ways.

>>78745587
On your psychological stuff try reading Melville's Moby Dick, he devotes a full chapter to explaining why white can also be a horrid, terrifying color.

There is an observation in anthropology that all cultures consider pale skin as a desirable trait in women, mind you this is not the case for men, there's already a good body of work dealing with what you consider historical/societal factors.

As for the rest they just read like standard rationalizations for racism, which is the point many of your implied asumptions are coming from, number wise there's never been as many ethnic Europeans alive as today, in terms of variation there are far more important and less apparent genetic traits than eye color (light colored eyes are far more susceptible to cancer and other health conditions) or hair color, blonde hair is present in native melanesians btw.

You can't really have this discussion because working under biased asumptions already begs the question of the purpose for such a conservation. Racist circlejerking isn't really a worthy objective.

>>78745885
>South American and other "exotic" girls are interesting because they're not common, so that argument works both ways.
true, but you also know there's plenty more where they came from, so I'd say you would have to relativize

>>78745942
>On your psychological stuff try reading Melville's Moby Dick, he devotes a full chapter to explaining why white can also be a horrid, terrifying color.
I was forgetting something, I wanted to include negative associations like "coldness" (color of the snow), calculating/scheming

>number wise there's never been as many ethnic Europeans alive as today,
true, but ethnic europeans have at no point of history been this rare in relation to other skin colors

>there are far more important and less apparent genetic traits than eye color
ture, but color is one of the most apparent features of a person
with different eye colors for example there's always something to "discover" in a person

I'm honestly trying not to make this a racist thread, but it's a slippery slope

>>78745942
White people may be more numerous today, but our percentage as the world population is incredibly low, making us more rare than we were before.

>As for the rest they just read like standard rationalizations for racism, which is the point many of your implied asumptions are coming from, number wise there's never been as many ethnic Europeans alive as today, in terms of variation there are far more important and less apparent genetic traits than eye color (light colored eyes are far more susceptible to cancer and other health conditions) or hair color, blonde hair is present in native melanesians btw.
Yeah but these differences are very striking. When I visited Japan pretty much everyone I got to know pointed out my blue eyes at some point, usually saying something like "Anata wa umi no me o motte iru!" or "You have the sea eyes".

And yeah, some rare tribes of nonwhites have blonde hair, but it is not common at all outside of the White populous.

>>78746197
>I'm honestly trying not to make this a racist thread, but it's a slippery slope
Let's say you are, the problem of asumptions still remains. I mentioned the affinity for pale skin in women of all cultures, should we also talk about how dark skin is considered more manly? It is scientific fact testosterone factors into melanin production and darkens hair and skin color, you could argue the traditional preference for "tall, dark strangers" meaning dark haired men, is tied to more aggressive traits in individuals with higher testosterone.

The traditional association of fairness with feminine traits, eg blondes being stupid or lighter skin being delicate is also worth exploring. In all fairness an argument could be made those interracial couples /poltards like to post here so much do represnt extremes in human variation that do correspond to male and female traits.

Again, where is it you want to go with this discussion? What's the objective? What's the question you want to answer?

>>78746513
Oh come on man, I'm white, it doesn't mean I buy into romanticizing European traits "sea eyes" sounds like cheap 19th century orientalism to me.

In Mexico blonde hair is often despectively compared to the silk in corn (pelos de elote or corn hair) and I've heard light colored eyes copmpared to those of blind people. This is in a country of centuries old relentless anti-amerindian racism.

I've also heard the comparison that white people must have looked like corpses to Amerindians, being pale and discoloured like mumified bodies.

The asumptions we make about whiteness and beauty are cultural, not instinctive or "natural"

White people are the descendants of Nordic Alien Angels who were trying to help out the natives of Aerth (Earth), and so bred with the native men to spawn a superior race to inhabit the lands (White people). These aliens were extremely beautiful and so were their descendants, who had blue eyes and blonde hair, but also superior facial structure.

>>78746610
>Again, where is it you want to go with this discussion? What's the objective? What's the question you want to answer?
I want to discuss if whiteness or fairer skin is universally more aesthetically pleasing and desirable without making it about racism, but the balancing of pros and cons

>should we also talk about how dark skin is considered more manly?
well yea, that's sort of important I'd say, but I also think the relation to class differences is important here as well, the pale nerd for example maybe is not as brown and "manly", because he's not outside playing football with the other chads
even on an international level htere's this association I'd say, it's the difference between the developed world and other parts with more manual labour

>>78746805
Fair enough. I don't think beauty is objective. I don't really know what OP has been trying to do. I'm just pointing out that in Japan, people loved seeing my eyes, and that for me personally, I generally prefer the aesthetic of Whites- the pale skin, the different colours of hair, the general facial make-up of Europeans. Doesn't mean I don't find other races attractive.

I think OP was merely trying to find some kind of consensus in world beauty standards- which probably doesn't exist. But I know in Asia, pale skin has always been seen as beautiful in many places even before they saw Whites. So when they saw how pale Whites were, they thought it was beautiful to their already existing standards.

>>78745587
Yes, because fair skin is associated to europe and maybe east noth asia, and europe is the best

>>78747003
Fair enough, see >>78746805 I'd argue fairness isn't universally more desirable, but rather than in the global age it might look like so because of American media's dominance.

>>78745587
Even the East Asians like chinese, japanese and koreans like light skin as a cultural tradition, just look at geishas for a good example.