Yuk! I prefer the natural look, especially the tanned natural look. But I’m glad to hear that you’re taking my advice and getting into girls already!
sorry double posting!
You are right, for some reason, most men in TW are into white, skinny, pale looking girls… No wonder I am not popular here ! 
Heck, at least I look healthy, damn it!
But doesn’t pale = not healthy??
high maintenance, too :?
Well I cover myself in order to avoid looking like a tomato.
not to worry girl!!! all my older male cousins always complain about the lack of “ass” on taiwanese women …hahaha…
Almas, there’s only one problem with your “hepatitis” logic – the eyes turn bright orange-yellow too. One of my former coworkers had it, and although his skin was never noticeably off-color, his eyes looked like they’d been dunked in mercurochrome. I forced him to get his @ss out of our office and into his doctor’s. (The dumb sh*t tried to argue, but luckily I was his administrative supervisor at the time. . . .)
[quote=“almas john”]
As for your statement that you’ve never seen “white white” - you have obviously never seen Big Fluffy Matthew’s arse.[/quote]
Almas, I’m seriously worried about that observation. Are you telling us that you have had visual contact with Big Fluffy Matthew’s bare buttocks?
Ewww… :shock: I hope you were kidding about liking those pale rejects from the Tammy Fae Baker School of Cosmetology? Ok… I may be gay, but I can still tell what consitutes a beautiful woman (I just don’t want to go to bed with one). And, most of those “make-up chicks” are not beautiful (in MHO, of course 
).
This thread has just made me realize why they all tend to where so much sparkly base powder, blue eye-shadow, and funky colored lipsticks. They are trying to bring color to their pale faces. Maybe instead of selling skin whiteners, someone here should just find a good, safe tanning cream to sell. Then we could see some color without this looking like the set of an Asian ghost movie.
[quote=“Omniloquacious”][quote=“almas john”]
As for your statement that you’ve never seen “white white” - you have obviously never seen Big Fluffy Matthew’s arse.[/quote]
Almas, I’m seriously worried about that observation. Are you telling us that you have had visual contact with Big Fluffy Matthew’s bare buttocks?[/quote] Who hasn’t ? 
I haven’t, but I’m fairly new here. All in due time.
I haven’t either… but, maybe if you tell me what exactly about you is fluffy, and I like it… I might just make the effort. 
I haven’t either… but, maybe if you tell me what exactly about you is fluffy, and I like it… I might just make the effort. [/quote]That’s for me (and everyone else) to know and for you to find out. But I’m afraid I find beards a turn off, even on women…
The women in Taiwan wear waaay too much makeup. The key with makeup is to use it very sparingly. Gobbing white gunk and blue eyeshadow all over your face just makes you look garish.
[quote=“almas john”]Elementary biology my dear Kenny,
I’ve read quite a lot of books on evolutionary biology (especially those that are related to Neanderthals) and come across this a couple of times. Skin color is such an explosive subject most academics are afraid to touch it.
Basically, disease in humans usually causes skin color changes or skin markings. Hepatitis, for example, gives a yellow tint to the skin. This is much more detectable in someone who has paler skin. Think about wearing a white T-shirt as opposed to a brown one.
Of course there are many other factors to consider, but if you are looking at a pale naked blemish-free body then you are looking at good breeding stock. The darker skinned person could be just as healthy but it is harder to be sure of it.
The Almas is willing to give all the Forumosa girls a free skin check up.
[/quote]
The logic here doesn’t quite work for me. If dark skins hide their illnesses and blemishes easier (like a camoflauge), doesn’t that mean dark skins would reproduce more often than white skins? The light skins would reveal even their minor illnesses more easily, leading to less reproduction. Partners would on average pick a darker skinned person who had managed to successfully hide his/her illnesses.
I also think this theory totally ignores body hair. Europeans seem to have a lot of body hair that covers up their skin, whereas blacks and Asians seem to be less hairy. (true?) If blacks and Asians have less hair, their illnesses would be easier to see than the Europeans.
As someone who finds body hair (on men) sexy, I can tell you that you are right. Generally, people of European, Latino, Middle Eastern & Mediterranean ancestory tend to have more body hair. And, generally, people of African and Asian ancestory tend to have less body hair. Notice I say “generally” and “tend.” Because, these statements are generalizations based on averages.
I certainly know of and have seen many completely smooth European men and a number of hairy Asian men (the Japanese tend to be the most hairy, by far). There is almost more variation within ethnic groups as there are between them.
However, what, if anything, amount of body hair has to due with “evolutionary” selection based on hiding physical “defects” is beyond me.
The Japanese… probably because they have the most genetic links to the Central Asian/Turkic/something else genes.
Northern Chinese also tend to be hairier. They historically have mixed genes with more Turkic peoples, e.g. Tang dynasty or other non-Han dynasties than say southern Chinese.
as for the illness with light and dark skin, ‘elementary biology’ or not, I don’t buy it. at least it’s a minor factor (the choice and recognizing the healthiness factor). there’s many other ways to determine healthiness than just skin color or the idea you suggest regarding skin color rather (not skin color itself).
[quote=“QuietMountain”]
As someone who finds body hair (on men) sexy, I can tell you that you are right. Generally, people of European, Latino, Middle Eastern & Mediterranean ancestory tend to have more body hair. And, generally, people of African and Asian ancestory tend to have less body hair. Notice I say “generally” and “tend.” Because, these statements are generalizations based on averages.
.[/quote]
Quoting you again QM.
Body hair or no body hair. It matters most which body the hair is, or isn’t, attached to. Skin colour as well. But I can’t say that back hair on men is that nice, unless the body it’s on is… And I don’t mean that in a purely physical sense.
I find hairy underarms on women revolting. Yuk! But that’s how I was conditioned. I was 13 when I got my first subscription to 17 magazine.
No crunchy granola birkenstock and patchouli wearing gal, me.
I actually pay money to get tan. How bizarre is that? But I have my reasons, and strangely enough, they’re medical.
There’s no need to apologise for your strangeness pussy cat. 
[quote=“Kenny McCormick”]The Japanese… probably because they have the most genetic links to the Central Asian/Turkic/something else genes.
[/quote]
Actually, most certainly because the Japanese interbred ages ago with the original inhabitants of the islands, the Ainu - a Caucasian peoples that have more body hair than any other group in the world. The hairy Ainu still exist in small numbers on Hokkaido, where the Japanese invaders drove them north.