Did you knew that portuguese people are not meds?
>>224281100>knew*know
>>224281113Incorrect
>>224281100Of course I knew that, people aren't meds. I've never met annoying who confused some meds with a group of people. Let alone portuguese.
>>224281100well its obvious theyre atlantics
Even people from north italy are not meds. We are cisalpine, we come from Longobards
>>224281100>tattoos>long nails>makeupyuck
>>224281100her thighs says “أنا من أولئك ، ممن يموتون حين يحبون” “I am one of those people who die when they love”its a quote from Mahmoud Darwish who is a Palestinian poet
>>224281426This.
>>224281426>>224281446Shut the fuck up incels
>>224281464Low IQ macaco lolhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35449026/
>>224281702>kirkegaardlol
>>224281702 just post girls with tattoos. I'm not asking for PhDs, just a nice ass
>>224281758>didn't read the study award>argument from authority fallacy award (big midwit indicator)>>224281801You are free to like whatever type of women you want, even if that woman is a barely-sentient whore. I was just posting some information for the thread's consideration, nothing more.
I like this
>>224281702>dumb girls is le bad retarded
>>224281870>>didn't read the study awardNo one will.You're just wasting your time
>>224281936This attitude is at least partially responsible for why your country is still a shithole btw.>no ordem>no progresso
>>224281967>>224281965
>>224281870>bachelor in linguistics>vast majority of "studies" posted on his own journal >no one with serious credentials has ever reviewed any of his "work">nearly all of his studies have problematic samples but he makes broad generalizations over themKinda conveniant to just say "argument from authority fallacy" when anyone with strong credentials or who he isn't a part of your ideology criticizes you to the point where you have to pick from your "natural allies" to have anyone take your "data" seriously.
>>224281967>Nooooo you need to read a random study that says ink causes brain damage o algo asi
>>224282024>>224281758Kek I thought you were talking about the philosopher
>claim others never read the study>doesn't even bother posting any link to the study>gets a random other study saying unrelated to the picture>all he has is this picture he randomly stumbled upon while on twitter in between 2 shitpostsIntellectual btw
>>224282024Exactly which one of these 5 people is a bachelor in linguistics, you coping tattoo'd BPD whore? Here's another one for good measurehttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s007370050018
>>224281702>one source of one study by one guyWow, you have me totally convinced!
>>224282072You're mentaly ill
>>224282046>somehow reversing causality on something this obviousKEK you seriously can't make this shit up. Macaco status: confirmed.>>224282071I was referring to the study I linked, which supports at least one of the two claims made in the image. But of course, you're just grasping at straws because you regret getting stupid doodles all over your body now that it's no longer "cool" or "countercultural".https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/pmh.43
>>224282052I mean, this one is also kind of a philosopher the way he questions the meaning of what it means to be an actual scientist who studied the fields he makes studies upon or even the meaning of what n-values or composite scores mean when it comes to methodology
>N=36lmao
>>224282092>another pathetic doodle-regretter has joined the chatKEKSee:>>224282072>>224282103And here, have another - because why not.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ijd.14372
>>224282125>>224282106Any more copes?Go ahead and post your tattoos, let's see how stupid they look.
>>224282127Why tattoos cause you to seethe so hard?
>>224282127>let me randomly search studies and mix correlations with intelligence, mental health and "risky behavior"Wewhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886914005698
>>224281702>>224281870>>224282072>if I only post stuff that affirms my existing confirmation bias so I will feel better!Sorry to ruin your "high".https://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/article/10.11648/j.pbs.20150404.14https://psychology.msu.edu/news-events/news/tattoo-study.htmlHere's another good one:>While most people, regardless of their tattoo status, perceived tattooed and non-tattooed individuals equally, tattooed individuals were more likely to be perceived negatively than positively by those without tattoos.https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10693284/The only retard here is (You). You perceive tattooed people to be beneath you but in reality it's just you either choosing to ignore or being unaware of your own cognitive disabilities, including the very obvious biases you hold.>t. tatted and more intelligent than you
>>224282160They are just aesthetically unpleasing. You just don't put a sticker on a sportcar. You see, not everybody who disagrees with you is seething.
>>224282160The only people seething ITT right now are the coping doodle sluts trying to ignore my EPIC TRVKE DROPS
>>224282176It'a a roastie bro, I'd not trust her "research". https://psychology.wvu.edu/faculty-and-staff/faculty-directory/kathleen-morrisonMost of tattoed women I saw in my life were retarded roasties with daddy issues
>>224282214>my cherrypicked studies > your cherrypicked studies!This is why nothing you're both saying will ever be taken seriously
>>224282176https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352296803_Massive_use_of_tattoos_and_psychopathological_clinical_evidence>>224282181>>if I only post stuff that affirms my existing confirmation bias so I will feel better!Oh you mean like exactly what you just did? LOLLiterally only the first link you sent is relevant to the conversation. The other two links are on external perception of tattootards, which has absolutely nothing to do with actual mental health or intelligence.>>t. tatted and more intelligent than youEvidently not, given the elementary level mistake you just made. But I extend the same invitation I gave to the French flag to you: post em, let's see those stupid doodles.
>>224282184He's clearly seething, and seething hard
>>224281100>portuguesenope
>>224282252That's pretty good do you have 30 more random studies you didn't even bother reading to share?
>>224281936You've never dated a dumb girl before to be saying this. In fact you probably never dated anyone before.
>>224282236>non peer reviewed study done by one single researcher vs multiple studies done by teams of researchersYes, in this particular case your cherrypicked study is not as robust as the other cherrypicked studies.But even if we give "Kathleen" the benefit of the doubt here, let's read:>The present study questions this association and hypothesises that tattooed women will be as psychosocially healthy as non-tattooed women, using generativity as a measure of psychosocial healthIn other words, it's not actually measuring mental health at all, but rather an arbitrary qualitative observation of how willing they are to participate in ostensibly pro-social behaviors.Actual conclusion: tattooed women are just as likely to volunteer at animal shelters, donate to charities, and "make art" as non-tattooed women. (According to the measures outlined in her own study)Real groundbreaking stuff, kek.
>>224282273See: >>224282349>you didn't even bother reading to share?Looks like this was a pretty big projection on your part lmaoooo
>>224282072>causation = correlationYou've just read the title, haven't you?
>>224282236>taken seriouslySorry I don't care>The author acknowledges Macquarie University as funding provider of this research.Biased roastie wrote some biased roastie research
>>224282390>epic strawmanBehold, the peak of Brapzilian intellectualism.
>>224282456Let me ask you next to time to write me a research about cool I am and I will be the one who funds that research we are cool right?Then I will show this retarded cunt >>224282236 your "research" and he will accept that I'm a cool guy and he is a f*ench cuck
>>224282185
>>224281100
>>224281100I appreciate women who know they would be unstoppable with tattoos so they nerf themselves by one point by getting them.
>>224281100portuguese girl feet toes
Portuguese women are made for racemixing with Anglo men
>>224281100piedini
>>224283318keeeekkkk
>>224281441R.I.P. Darwish
Women with tattoos are good for insane sexual degeneracy you would never want the mother of your children to do to you.Getting rimmed by your crazy ex tattood gf = good but by your wife = vile
>>224281100what the fuck does "mediterranean" mean? no one uses this term. people will say southern, meridional, latins, but never mediterranean to describe a people. The only time you'll hear people IRL use the word mediterranean it is to refer to a climate, an environment, sometimes an architectural style, which in this case it's always just a synonym for southern european
>>224281100Extremely high sexual market value female. The cost of these tattoos means she either has a supportive father or she can pay for herself without the need for a man. Nice genetics, knows how to be sexy, very cute feet. Eats pizza and not fucking vegan tofu soup. And according to >>224281441she knows good poetry and her politics align with those of a good moral person.You will never date a woman like her, but I will.
>Extremely high sexual market value female. The cost of these tattoos means she either has a supportive father or she can pay for herself without the need for a man. Nice genetics, knows how to be sexy, very cute feet. Eats pizza and not fucking vegan tofu soup. And according to >>224281441>she knows good poetry and her politics align with those of a good moral person.>You will never date a woman like her, but I will.
>>224281100They are SUEBI BVLLS
>>224282390biggest nitwit argumentthe difference between correlation and causation doesn't matter if the correlation is robust enough. regardless of the underlying mechanism, if you've got strong evidence of correlation between two variables you expect that correlation to persist for new data. aka if you know tatoos are strongly and persistently correlated with low IQ whores then you can safely assume a woman with tattoos is a low IQ whore regardlless of how this phenomenon came about
>>224281100indeed
