Post: #126

As for beaches all these beaches and resorts on the Black Sea are a joke compared to Greek islands regarding both the sea, the scenery and the beach itself.There is really no comparison.The only advantage they have is the mass presence of very good hotels offering rooms in very good prices.Such a concentration of high buildings destroying the scenery is never to be seen on Greek islands.On the other hand they provide quite a few comforts.

Post: #127

(03-02-2013 08:52 AM)Greek kamaki Wrote:  As for beaches all these beaches and resorts on the Black Sea are a joke compared to Greek islands regarding both the sea, the scenery and the beach itself.There is really no comparison.The only advantage they have is the mass presence of very good hotels offering rooms in very good prices.Such a concentration of high buildings destroying the scenery is never to be seen on Greek islands.On the other hand they provide quite a few comforts.

I agree. The communists destroyed its beauty. I don't agree on the hotels: below five stars, it's crap in my view.

Post: #128

(03-01-2013 10:17 AM)Hooligan Harry Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 07:53 PM)Mersault Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 07:43 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 07:36 PM)Mersault Wrote:  Romanian girls, as any European will probably know, are recognised as the easiest in Europe.

Didn't know that.

Is that the indisputable truth?

Like, if you asked anyone on the street, "What are the easiest girls in Europe?"

People will respond, "Without question, Romanian girls."

?

Indisputable truth? Well, that's an epistemological conundrum. When it comes to such normative statements, i think we might agree there are no absolute indisputable truths. Let me put it this way...

a European businessman has money and a reputation to consider.
If he marries an Italian he gains in credibility.
If he marries a French girl he gains in credibility.
The same for Sweden, Norway and, perhaps, Denmark. Finland, not really.
If he marries a Bulgarian it's because he didn't have enough game, money or credibility to 'get' an Italian, French, Scandinavian and didn't have enough confidence to get a Romanian. Moldovan's are even lower.

Sure, these are weak social strata i am describing here, but the perceptions run through a typical European mind. A Spanish construction worker who marries a Romanian is seen as having 'bought' her because she is easy. And that is a low Spaniard, and a Spaniard is a lower European in the standards (compared to Italian, German, Scandinavian, French, British etc).

Hmm. This is cultural actuality without the required deconstruction to prove it or convince you that it is anything more than a theory. Perhaps another time i will think this out and make it clear, but, right now, i maintain what i said. Romanian girls are considered easy, the easiest in Europe, and any man with one is seen as having bought her, regardless of how hot she is. Now, sure, that also applies to Russians and Poles, and so on, but with Romanians, it is seen as a little cheaper.

Is it fair, or even prudent? Probably not. But it is a type of meme that runs through a western European individuals mind.

This is an outright crock of shit.

Romanian women are not easy, its just that so many of them are whores these days simply because the typical financial situation of the average Romanian is brutal by European standards. One of Romania's biggest exports is its women and this is driven predominantly by poverty. Romanians abroad are not an indication of Romanians in Romania at all though.

Its one poorest of the Eastern European countries and the women are prone to fucking their way out of poverty, as was the case in most of EE and Russia when it was in the pits too. Which means that all those players talking up how easy Romanian women are, are banging out pro's for the most part. Either in their own countries as they mack it up in brothels and strip clubs which are inundated with Romanians, or in Romania itself, which has been hammered by sex tourists from Italy and Turkey in particular.

And how the hell does any man gain credibility based on the nationality of the woman he marries? Im curious to know how marrying a French or Italian women ADDS to ones credibility. Likewise how there is some sort of European ranking championship underway where a womans nationality somehow holds some sort of status marker? Christ, I have no idea where people come with this shit sometimes.

Anyone who has been to Romania will tell you that Romanian women are probably some of the most diverse in Europe. Romania is a melting pot of Slav, Balkan, Gypsy, Turk, Persian and European to the point that the people can often be so diverse in looks you wont know what the hell their nationality was until they told you they were Romanian. They are probably the most exotic women on the continent. Which means you could have walked past 100 Romanians in the street yesterday and not even realised that they were fucking Romanians 95% of the time.

Its not a place to trust people easily and the women are no different. There are a lot of scammers there and the women are no different in some cases. Which means whoring is a national pass time in the place for many women, but that is not a reflection on all of them.

Romania is no easier or more difficult than most places in Eastern Europe. As always location will matter. The women are very approachable for the most part, and while some have bitch shields they are not a mile high. Its easy to plow through it though and its not over the top by any means, but it exists because of the sex tourists that have been hunting there for two decades now. Decent chicks and middle class chicks are going to take the mandatory 2-3 dates/nights out to lay unless you really hit her buttons right. SNL is always possible, but its not always certain there at all and the women are pretty damn conservative despite the fact that they are affectionate.

Looks wise they are right up there. I have a thing for brunettes with very green eyes or blue eyes and its the one place I have found it the most common. There are a lot of average women there by EE standards, but there are some outright stunners that will knock your socks off too.

This is one of the odd things about Romania. There are a lot of average looking women by EE standards. A lot more 4's and 5's and some real pigs. Its just that the 9's and 10's are so off the chain sometimes that the fuglies become invisible.

The top 10% of women in Romania would arguably be some of the best in the world.

In Romania you can bang more 7's and 8's per approach then anywhere else i have been. Yes, it might be 2 dates after the initial meet, that doesn't detract from the point. How so you might ask? Well...again, i will resort to zooming out and generalising, but, were you to take a Moscovite 7-8 on a couple of dates, you would need to play it pretty well, put in some work, and then maybe get the bang, depending on so many external factors you might as well be gambling on whether the borsch she had for lunch was warm or hot. See, to my mind, regardless of game, there are factors beyond oneself that contribute to an end result. I might chance to work some incredible wit, humour and innuendo into a discussion, have her drink, and do everything else correct besides, and still end up NOT banging, whilst, on another time with a Russian 7-8, for whatever it is worth, i might be in a nihilistic mood, talk about ennui, mumble my way through proceedings and be as charming as a broken headphone, but still end up with the bang. How and why? Simply, by my reckoning, because something are beyond our control, which is a truth i am willing to cede to and not argue with. To think otherwise is to have no wisdom. Not that i have wisdom. No no. Yes yes. Anyway.

The point i am trying to make is that in other countries, like Russia (specifically Moscow), getting a 7-8 on a date isn't that hard. It's not like turning a pillow, but it isn't like changing sheets. It takes a bit of effort, but not loads. In Romania it is even slightly easier. And, as the little example above attempted to show, once you have them out again, where it is all up in the air and we try to direct probability / chance in our favour, well, in Moscow, let's say that we need that probability chance favour to be on our side at, say, 70%, then we get a bang, whereas in Romania, so long as you don't mess up, shit, i just thought of a fairly good example. It is like a course rate with a low pass mark. So long as you don't truly mess up, just turn up, do a bit of work, present yourself as somewhat credible (achievable simply by default by being a nationality that is western as opposed to European but not being a douchebag from there) then you can get the bang with only 40% mark achieved. You need not be particularly cool, funny, interesting. Just be a little bit of something, get that 40%, and you will bang the 7-8.

That constitutes Romanian girls being easier. Oh, that is a horrible turn of phrase. Let me put it another way. Romanian girls take less work than others.
Sure, you can bang a 7-8 after 2 dates anywhere in the western world, but your chance of 1) getting them on the date 2) banging them after 2 dates...... is dependent on many things. In Romania it is easier to get them on the date and then easier to bang them through less work. That is the case not merely relative to western and northern European countries but also to eastern and southern European European ones.

If you still maintain that isn't the case then fair enough. Only i have elaborated upon my reasoning, across a handful of posts, and explained fairly clearly, although not in any way succinctly, why it is so. Romanian girls are easier.


--------------

Now, to the other part. I never said there was a European ranking championship. I alluded to a ranking type system. What is the difference? Your terminology suggests there is an end game, with a winner, whereas mine suggests a constant table of slowly changing rankings. It is a fine subtle difference, but, either you missed it, changed my point for your own benefit, or something between the two, but, it needs to be clarified. It is not a championship. It is a ranking type system.

So. You state that such a suggestion is, well, a crock of shit and you implore for Christ to help you understand where such a theory might come from. Well, ask yourself, really, in a world ranking type strata, are Americans not considered 'above' Thai's? Or Fillipinos? Or Indians?
I think we might say that they are. Is it just? No, but this isn't an ethics class so let's avoid that debate for now and stick upon what is. Americans are considered above Thai's. An American man being with a Thai woman, well, he is seen, by his and western society at large, as having 'failed' to pick up one of his 'own', or he might be considered a seedy type, or as having 'bought' her. Again, just to clarify, i won't touch upon the ethics of such views, i will merely state the case that they are.

Now. This example is both true and easily observed, right?
Ok, wait, allow me to hold up a moment. As a fellow forum member, i'd like to add something. Excuse this pedantic form of Socratic method i am employing here, which no doubt comes across as cuntish, but i'm at a loss as to how better get the point across when it has already been missed earlier. No doubt that is my fault for not making it clear enough.

Ok. So, the example about the American, i think most would it true and readily observable? An American, in world game, is above a Thai and the other nationalities previously mentioned, plus hundreds more.
And, by similar observation, we might also agree that French, Italians, Germans, Spaniards, Danes, Swedes, Brits, are also above other nationalities in terms of 'social standing' (read...world game). I think very few would disagree on this. A man, a Swede, for example, approaching a Thai, would think, and quite accurately too, that she is reckoning upon him a type of value, one that is above herself and her other fellow suitors. Besides everything else, simply be being Swedish, he has value to her. What am i saying here? Nothing new. Nothing controversial. And yet this very thing is merely a part of the very theory you were dismissing, calling crock shit and so on. Just as America or Sweden might be above the Thai, so, too, in the upper echelons of the ranking, among Europeans, is there a strive for ranking type action constantly taking place. Just as would agree that an American would be considered above a Thai would you not consider it ridiculous if i said that a Bulgarian was above a Brit?
Yes, i think any reasonable person with a sense for the sensible and a comprehension of the world would see as much. To say that a Bulgarian, in world ranking of (appearance, credibility, etc) is above a Brit is as foolish as to say that a Peruvian man is above a Portuguese man. Sure, there are exceptions, after all, were it not for exceptions we, humans, would have gone crazy many a generation ago, but, by and large, the rules stand. A German is, in many regards, above a Greek, whilst a French is above a German and so on and so on. It isn't that hard to recognise that such a system exists, in fact, by merely acknowledging that Americans are above Thai's you are acknowledging that such a system exists. So, merely dig a little deeper and see what you find. You will find that within this ranking system there are other nationalities involved. It isn't simply black and white. It isn't Americans on one side and some Asians on the other. In between there are Kenyans, Croatians, Aussies and Chileans, all vying for ranking in world credibility. They do not do so knowingly or consciously as individuals, rather, it is a mass collective thing unseen to most eyes. It isa consequence of soft diplomacy, hard diplomacy, economics, world trends, media, culture, and everything else to boot.
Such logic, if you might care to agree, is merely a continuation, and nothing more, of the idea that Americans are considered above Thais by Thai women. If you accept that then you acknowledge the idea of social ranking by nationality.

See, just as we know that when a fridge is opened the light will usually go on, but not always, we know that within a country there is a ranking system. It is typically called class. Thanks Marxists. Now, beyond that, not 'in' countries, no no, but what i am speaking of is that 'class' that exists 'between' countries.

One above another, one below, and so on.
Now, in Europe, where we have so many nations sharing such a small space, such battle for class between these nations is nothing new. This isn't historical revisionism and it most certainly isn't economic theory applied to social studies. No. This is far simpler, cruder and yet, still, absolutely true. I don't deny i haven't formulated the argument suitable, in fact i have done so in a rush, whilst following the football and eating some bacon. Forgive me. I don't deny your anecdote served your point well (about being with the hot Romanian and her being well received for - or in spite of - it). Just as you have the anecdote that suggests her nationality wasn't an issue, i too might provide one or several that say the opposite, only i have been typing too long now and am actually going to end this hastily. I just become sick with myself for wasting too long typing this up when it occurred to me that i actually could care less what you think and if you wish to deny what is the case then fair enough. Yet, i might as well round this up. Oh this stupid vanity.
Anyway, you say, or at least insinuate that you think, that there is no social ranking between nations and not in Europe. You suggest it is preposterous that being with a beautiful Romanian girl for an Italian, for example, might be seen as a social negative, but yet you would, i imagine, readily agree that were it an American with a Thai such a social negative idea would form....

When i am comparing an American being with a Thai with a western European being with a Romanian, i am essentially acknowledging the social strata that exists in the world and is acknowledged, at some level, although not necessarily consciously, by all who partake in it. The American being with the Thai is the obvious example because they are almost two polar opposites. The western European being with the Romanian isn't that easy to see and needs a clearer less obfuscated take on things. It is like comparing a team in 7th with a team in 11th. It isn't that easy. Only, for some, it is easily and readily understood.

A Frenchman is above a Greek, and a Greek is above an Albanian. Is it fair? No. But, again, this isn't about ethics. This is about common perception. Shit, i have various passports. I know from experience (you know when you were younger and in a bar and a girl nagged you to prove you aren't local and you eventually agree after some playful teasing) that if i use my British one somewhere, as opposed to one of my Mediterranean ones, the look she gives is completely different. The very fact she will look at me different depending on which passport i produce, to me, is proof that such things such as 'class' between nations, exists. You can dispute it, as you did, but i have seen it in action and continue to do so.

This, as said before, is relative to each country but, despite that, by and large, there is a general concept of what such a ranking strata looks like.

And so, from such class perception between nations, Romanians are considered by other Europeans among the lowest in Europe. Ought they to be? Probably not. But they are. And that is the case.


----

So, i have explained how and why i said that Romanian girls are easier than others in Europe and i have explained why my theory of social ranking between nations is quite obvious and nothing deemed worthy of being called 'a crock of shit'.

There is no satisfaction from me having done so. It was a waste of time. I might as well delete this whole thing. But it is here, i have written it, and i might as well spite you with it.

Post: #129

The general ranking among nations in Europe is WASPS> Germanics> Mediteraneans> Slavs.The difference between Anglosaxons and Germanics is considered negligible because they are considered cousins while the difference between Germanics and Mediteraneans or Germanics and Slavs is considered vast.
Among Germanics Germans,Scandinavians,Dutch,Austrian, Swiss are considered equal except maybe Norwegians who are considered richer.
Among Mediteraneans Italians are slightly above the Spanish who are above the Greeks.
Among Slavs the ladder is Czechs>Poles>Slovaks>Russians>Croats> Serbs>Bulgarians>Belarussians> Ukrainians.All these schematically.
Botom are Albanians and Moldovans.
Romanian position is somewhere between Serbs and Bulgarians or between Serbs and Croats (Serbs maybe poorer now but have had more historical significance).

Post: #130

(03-02-2013 11:45 AM)Greek kamaki Wrote:  The general ranking among nations in Europe is WASPS> Germanics> Mediteraneans> Slavs.The difference between Anglosaxons and Germanics is considered negligible because they are considered cousins while the difference between Germanics and Mediteraneans or Germanics and Slavs is considered vast.
Among Germanics Germans,Scandinavians,Dutch,Austrian, Swiss are considered equal except maybe Norwegians who are considered richer.
Among Mediteraneans Italians are slightly above the Spanish who are above the Greeks.
Among Slavs the ladder is Czechs>Poles>Slovaks>Russians>Croats> Serbs>Bulgarians>Belarussians> Ukrainians.All these schematically.
Botom are Alabanians and Moldovans.
Romanian position is somewhere between Serbs and Bulgarians or between Serbs and Croats (Serbs maybe poorer now but have had more historical significance).

Yes. A ranking system is in place. It is indiscreet and not PC, yet it is as true as weather.

One man from one country being with a woman from a lesser country has an adverse effect on his social standing and to claim otherwise is naive. She might be beautiful, smart and slightly above him within her own country's equivalent class structure, but in the greater scheme of things she is a lesser part. Of course i am not including the highest echelons of power here, the elites. Likewise, a man from a lesser country being with a chick from a higher country has a positive effect. In Moscow i met an American girl, an 8, and were she taller she might have been a 9, from California, well educated and plenty of other positives on top. She had moved to Moscow to be with a Russian gopnik who had wooed her over facebook. She was infatuated. Now, was she abused as a child, molested as a young teenager and of a confused mind? Possibly. Was she a romantic era heroine hopelessly in love and willing to jump off a cliff to prove it? Possibly. Either way, the mans status in Moscow elevated hugely. He had attracted a hot young, but not so young that it might be discredited as teenage naivety gone too far, girl of one higher nationality to be with him.
Conversely, if the opposite happens, it is seen as 'acquiring', as going down a level, not going up, and is considered as such by almost anybody, at least at some level. For the Russian guy in this story, his social status benefited. For the American girl, her social status depreciated.

And such things, when relations are formed between people of different nationalities - or cities - (not ltr, no, even short term interactions) are always happening. One might be going up. Another is going down. And if we take greater academic theories, like the will to power, in their most elementary interpretation, we have to acknowledge that at some level these are crucial components of social interactions.

When a western European guy is with a Romanian girl it is almost always, if not definitively always, him going 'down' in the rankings by consequence of being with her.
The language i am using here is lame. I am not boring you, or myself, with researched and acquired vernacular particular to this point. That need not mean that the dressed down peasant farmer girl is not beautiful beneath the mud and torn dress. Simply put, there is a point here that your denial of is bemusing, considering this very forum at some general meta level acknowledges the point i am making. The point amounts to this.......There is distinction in social level between people. That is connected with nationality.

Being Romanian, a nationality, has an effect on your social level.

That is the general point.

Now, things are never so clear cut, as i also said earlier. A German factory worker getting with a Turkish German girl in Bonn has different social connotation than a German bar man getting with a Turkish German girl in Berlin. But, despite the exceptions, the rules by and large stand.
Romanians are seen as pretty much the lowest in Europe by other Europeans. Again, i am not saying that is just or right. It isn't. It is just the way things happen to be.

That in turn, has an effect on the Romanian mindset when approached by others, and, in turn, has an effect on the 'others' when they approach the Romanian. A lifetime of cultural indoctrination that a British dude is above a Romanian girl will come across in interaction, from each side. It can be used effectively to enhance game.

Anyway. I keep typing. It is past 5pm and i want a bath. My point has been made. I guess at some level i am keen on justifying it, probably related to my new membership on this forum, and yet, in conflict with this, is the case that i don't know you and if you agree with me or not will have little, if not zero, effect on my life. And yet here i am, justifying my justification.

Post: #131

All this has to do with property.If you marry a polish girl you marry her property which amasses on average 40000 euro.If you marry a German girl on the other hand she is likely to have 300000 Euro property at least.An Ukrainian girl is worth not more than 10000 euro and a Moldovan girl 5000 Euro.This gives a general outline girls are very aware of.It is very likely that for a lot of Eastern European girls their pussy is their only worthwile asset and they tend to exploit it to the maximum.

Girls view things from the opposite side.An average guy from the West is likely to have a property 10 times than their local counterparts so risking an adventure with a number of them means that they can secure relatively quickly a worthy groom.Especially in the case of polish girls if you do not marry them in the first six months of the relationship they move on or start the money extraction as a rent for the use you make.

Of course several other factors come into account including real chances of girls.For example for a Russian girl in Moscow an average westerner is likely to be considered as a cheapo since she can enjoy the services of Russian oligarchs who can bath her in serious amounts of cash.Such a girl is never compromised and has the privilege to do so.
Another provincial girl from the Russian backwaters has so limited chances on the other hand that every Westerner can seem a catch.Of course all this changes when she moves to the West and her eyes open to the new opportunities far beyond reach of the average Jo she had the unluckiness to marry.

Post: #132

(03-02-2013 12:48 PM)Greek kamaki Wrote:  All this has to do with property.If you marry a polish girl you marry her property which amasses on average 40000 euro.If you marry a German girl on the other hand she is likely to have 300000 Euro property at least.An Ukrainian girl is worth not more than 10000 euro and a Moldovan girl 5000 Euro.This gives a general outline girls are very aware of.It is very likely that for a lot of Eastern European girls their pussy is their only worthwile asset and they tend to exploit it to the maximum.

Girls view things from the opposite side.An average guy from the West is likely to have a property 10 times than their local counterparts so risking an adventure with a number of them means that they can secure relatively quickly a worthy groom.Especially in the case of polish girls if you do not marry them in the first six months of the relationship they move on or start the money extraction as a rent for the use you make.

Of course several other factors come into account including real chances of girls.For example for a Russian girl in Moscow an average westerner is likely to be considered as a cheapo since she can enjoy the services of Russian oligarchs who can bath her in serious amounts of cash.Such a girl is never compromised and has the privilege to do so.
Another provincial girl from the Russian backwaters has so limited chances on the other hand that every Westerner can seem a catch.Of course all this changes when she moves to the West and her eyes open to the new opportunities far beyond reach of the average Jo she had the unluckiness to marry.

Haha, telling it like it is.

I have thought of these communist family apartments that get passed down when thinking of a suitable lady. Find a German/Polish/Russian girl to shack up with, then get a smaller apartment for fucking other girls.

I wonder where one might these girls from affluent families.

Yes bringing a girl back to the west, will make her realise what a loser you are in your own country pretty quickly. It will be a Jessica Rabbit "Why don't you do right?" situation

Post: #133

A couple of comments: these rankings between societies are true, but often relative to the societies where the valuations are made. Trust me Ukrainians look down on Bulgarians and Moldavians and Turks and especially in western Ukraine, even Russians.

Asian countries have their own relative hierarchies.

Romania is interesting to me because in a lot of ways it just does not fit any bold and is a bit mysterious to me. The chatter here - which is all over the place - is not surprising I guess. Romance language country surrounded by Slavic countries. Gypsys.

I have appreciated the reports of guys who had lived their. I look forward to the reports from Roosh.

Post: #134

Not sure how western Ukrainians look at Bulgarians, but the FSU as a whole according to my wife looked favorable upon them. Romanians they don't look that favorable upon because they see them as being like Moldovan.But the Nazi's saw most Slavs as sub human and saw the Romanians as better since they are a Latin culture. So maybe part of the hate stems from WW2. The Romanians were the bulk stationed in Western and Southern Ukraine during ww2.
There are less Gypsies in Romania than USA,Brazil or France BTW. Its a stereotype.

Post: #135

(03-02-2013 12:19 PM)Mersault Wrote:  [...]
In Moscow i met an American girl, an 8, and were she taller she might have been a 9, from California, well educated and plenty of other positives on top. She had moved to Moscow to be with a Russian gopnik who had wooed her over facebook.
[...]

OMG...

Post: #136

(03-02-2013 03:16 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  Not sure how western Ukrainians look at Bulgarians, but the FSU as a whole according to my wife looked favorable upon them. Romanians they don't look that favorable upon because they see them as being like Moldovan.But the Nazi's saw most Slavs as sub human and saw the Romanians as better since they are a Latin culture. So maybe part of the hate stems from WW2. The Romanians were the bulk stationed in Western and Southern Ukraine during ww2.
There are less Gypsies in Romania than USA,Brazil or France BTW. Its a stereotype.

Recommend two books by Charles King to understand a lot of these subtleties: "Black Sea" and "Odessa: Genius and Death in the City of Dreams." The latter deals with a lot of the subtleties of the Odessa/Moldova region in WWII.

A messy patchwork of alliances and hatred. Western Ukrainian nationalists (in WWII) were generally aligned with the Nazi's: anti-Russian (Stalin, forced famine) and pro-German.

Post: #137

Another good thread with a great topic has turned into crap about Euro hierachy.

Post: #138

Post: #139

^^^ Worst chair dancing routine I've seen in my life!

Post: #140

G, I've been there recently, they smoke everywhere.

(02-28-2013 11:11 AM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

(02-28-2013 10:26 AM)Menace Wrote:  How about pictures of ordinary girls, not models. Anyone have those?

That's because all the girls are models there.

---

Let's get down to what is important:

What time do bars close there?

Can you smoke in bars?

Post: #141

Six pages, and Roosh hasn't even set foot in the place. Not sure if this is a good or bad omen.

Post: #142

What I want to know is with their latin ancestry does Romania have the latin ass that Roosh seems to crave.

It's a place that I've wanted to visit for the women for a very long time.

Post: #143

(03-02-2013 03:54 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  Another good thread with a great topic has turned into crap about Euro hierachy.

Well if you want to crack an EE chick this information is actually very valuable in my opinion.

Post: #144

(03-02-2013 03:16 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  Not sure how western Ukrainians look at Bulgarians, but the FSU as a whole according to my wife looked favorable upon them. Romanians they don't look that favorable upon because they see them as being like Moldovan.But the Nazi's saw most Slavs as sub human and saw the Romanians as better since they are a Latin culture. So maybe part of the hate stems from WW2. The Romanians were the bulk stationed in Western and Southern Ukraine during ww2.
There are less Gypsies in Romania than USA,Brazil or France BTW. Its a stereotype.

Dude there's 1.8 Million gypsies in Romania, that's almost ten percent of the population.

Are you saying that 10% of the US population are Gypsies?

Post: #145

(03-03-2013 12:44 PM)Alexander Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 03:16 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  Not sure how western Ukrainians look at Bulgarians, but the FSU as a whole according to my wife looked favorable upon them. Romanians they don't look that favorable upon because they see them as being like Moldovan.But the Nazi's saw most Slavs as sub human and saw the Romanians as better since they are a Latin culture. So maybe part of the hate stems from WW2. The Romanians were the bulk stationed in Western and Southern Ukraine during ww2.
There are less Gypsies in Romania than USA,Brazil or France BTW. Its a stereotype.

Dude there's 1.8 Million gypsies in Romania, that's almost ten percent of the population.

Are you saying that 10% of the US population are Gypsies?

According to wikipedia its 2.5% so are you adding some other ethnic classifications onto that beyond Romani's?

There is a sizable minority of Romani people in Romania, known as Ţigani in Romanian and, recently, as Rromi, of 535,140 people or 2.5% of the total population (2001 census).

Post: #146

(03-03-2013 05:41 PM)EU Explorer Wrote:  

(03-03-2013 12:44 PM)Alexander Wrote:  

(03-02-2013 03:16 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  Not sure how western Ukrainians look at Bulgarians, but the FSU as a whole according to my wife looked favorable upon them. Romanians they don't look that favorable upon because they see them as being like Moldovan.But the Nazi's saw most Slavs as sub human and saw the Romanians as better since they are a Latin culture. So maybe part of the hate stems from WW2. The Romanians were the bulk stationed in Western and Southern Ukraine during ww2.
There are less Gypsies in Romania than USA,Brazil or France BTW. Its a stereotype.

Dude there's 1.8 Million gypsies in Romania, that's almost ten percent of the population.

Are you saying that 10% of the US population are Gypsies?

According to wikipedia its 2.5% so are you adding some other ethnic classifications onto that beyond Romani's?

There is a sizable minority of Romani people in Romania, known as Ţigani in Romanian and, recently, as Rromi, of 535,140 people or 2.5% of the total population (2001 census).

LOL, even more funny that he would think 2 million gypsies in the USA is 10% of population. It would still be less than 1% of the population.USA has about 1 million(.033% of population) which is almost double that of Romania.Brazil has about 800k. Spain has more as well.Seems that France is almost even depending on the source.

Post: #147

(03-03-2013 12:07 PM)beta_plus Wrote:  What I want to know is with their latin ancestry does Romania have the latin ass that Roosh seems to crave.

I fail to understand how linguistics influences genetics.

Why should the decades of Roman occupation of Dacia have produced "latin" asses? Hey, the Romans occupied Britannia for a few decades, too. How come British girls do not have "latin" asses?

Seriously... this whole abuse of the word "latin" should be stopped. Romanian girls have nothing in common with Latin-American girls. Nothing in common.

Post: #148

(03-03-2013 08:33 PM)Icarus Wrote:  

(03-03-2013 12:07 PM)beta_plus Wrote:  What I want to know is with their latin ancestry does Romania have the latin ass that Roosh seems to crave.

I fail to understand how linguistics influences genetics.

Why should the decades of Roman occupation of Dacia have produced "latin" asses? Hey, the Romans occupied Britannia for a few decades, too. How come British girls do not have "latin" asses?

Seriously... this whole abuse of the word "latin" should be stopped. Romanian girls have nothing in common with Latin-American girls. Nothing in common.

Its because it was a republic of the Roman empire and after empire fell apart a large % of the Romans stayed behind. Centuries of inbreeding. They are certainly no less Latin than Hispanic Americans considering majority are not even traceable to Spain or any European Latin country. Alot are Africans crossed with native Americans. The true Latins are Italians,Spaniards,Portuguese,France. But Romania is included because of language and cultural reasons. But of course it has mixed blood and been heavily influenced by FSU.

Would it be more accurate to call Romania a Romance country with Slavic influences, or a Slavic country with a Romance language? Or is it just its own thing?

Post: #149

(03-03-2013 08:52 PM)jimukr104 Wrote:  

(03-03-2013 08:33 PM)Icarus Wrote:  

(03-03-2013 12:07 PM)beta_plus Wrote:  What I want to know is with their latin ancestry does Romania have the latin ass that Roosh seems to crave.

I fail to understand how linguistics influences genetics.

Why should the decades of Roman occupation of Dacia have produced "latin" asses? Hey, the Romans occupied Britannia for a few decades, too. How come British girls do not have "latin" asses?

Seriously... this whole abuse of the word "latin" should be stopped. Romanian girls have nothing in common with Latin-American girls. Nothing in common.

Its because it was a republic of the Roman empire and after empire fell apart a large % of the Romans stayed behind. Centuries of inbreeding. They are certainly no less Latin than Hispanic Americans considering majority are not even traceable to Spain or any European Latin country. Alot are Africans crossed with native Americans. The true Latins are Italians,Spaniards,Portuguese,France. But Romania is included because of language and cultural reasons. But of course it has mixed blood and been heavily influenced by FSU.

Would it be more accurate to call Romania a Romance country with Slavic influences, or a Slavic country with a Romance language? Or is it just its own thing?

I might fathom a guess and say that the history of the separation of the Roman Empire has much to do with this debate. The separation between east and west (Constantinople and Rome) involved more than just a geographical distinction. One side adopted the Latin language (the west) and the other adopted Greek (the east).
Besides the administrative classes who followed the move eastwards, when the Roman Empire moved its centre, most of the nobility stayed in Rome. I don't think there was a huge Roman presence (Roman as in 'from Rome' or thereabouts) in the Byzantine side, let alone Constantinople or even Rome. I'd guess and say in the low hundreds.

About the genetics, Romania, probably only because of its fertile land, was vastly populated from several hundred years before Christ. According to somebody, i can't recall who, probably a Greek or Roman historian, it was considered the most populous region in the known world after India. Anyway, because of the sacking of Constantinople, the failure of some Crusades, Ottoman influences and other Muslim or Asian invasions the land has been populated by so many different types for such long periods. I know that after Constantinople fell many Greeks from the Caucauses, nearby (modern day land of Georgia, Armenia, etc) and Greece itself fled to Romania. So did many Jews and Turks fearing the aftermath of the fall. Anyways, such a huge mix suggests why an understanding of Romanian genetics might be difficult to understand and, perhaps, why the language is so unique, despite being Latin based.

This is all formed from loose historical facts i can recall and logic. Possibly all way off. I doubt it though. I'm probably right.

Post: #150

For an examination on the Romanian language study "The History and Origins of English" By John Algeo.

I do not remember the exact "route" of Romanian, but from what I remember it was a bit of an outlier and lost in history.

The Gypsies come from the Romany people, who are traced back to India and Persia.

There is a lot of brostory being thrown around here, and much of it isn't right.