Medellin Reports

[QUOTE=Dickhead;2155387]Bolivia was never part of the Viceroyalty of New Granada. First, like all the others (except parts of coastal Venezuela), it was part of the Viceroyalty of Per. Then it became part of the Viceroyalty of the Ro de la Plata, not the Viceroyalty of New Granada. I believe there were about 40 years between the establishment of the Viceroyalty of Grenada and the Viceroyalty of the Ro de la Plata, with the former being first. I can tell you off the top of my head that the latter was created in the same year as the Declaration of Independence for the United States, 1776. New Granada was early to mid XVIII century. Bolivia still had a coastline back in those days.[/QUOTE]It was Peru that was part of the Vice Royalty. I had included Bolivia due to Simon Bolivar's quest to liberate the spanish colonies from Spain.

[QUOTE=SBeach25;2155441]It was Peru that was part of the Vice Royalty. I had included Bolivia due to Simon Bolivar's quest to liberate the spanish colonies from Spain.

[/QUOTE]Well, no, not really. The vast majority of what is now Perú remained in the Viceroyalty of Lima. Some of what is now Perú, but was then Ecuador, went to New Granada but that is a very small portion of what is now Perú. The initial separation of the Viceroyalty of New Granada from the Viceroyalty of Lima in the early XVIII century was primarily present day Colombia, Venezuela, and Ecuador. Later, Panamá, which eventually became part of Colombia, was brought into the Viceroyalty of New Granada. If I recall correctly, it also contained parts of what are now Brazil and Suriname. This was all part of the reforms instituted by the Bourbon Dynasty when the Viceroyalty of Lima became too unwieldy because of growth in the colonies. Eventually there were four viceroyalties before it all went to shit: Lima, New Granada, Río de la Plata, and New Spain (México and Central América); Panamá had been part of New Spain but was eventually incorporated into New Granada, becoming part of Colombia. The respective capitals were Lima, Bogotá, Buenos Aires, and México City. Obviously the Viceroyalty of Lima, and the city of Lima, saw its influence diminish when the two new viceroyalties of New Granada and Río de la Plata were created.

'Argento' means silver in Italian and 'plata,' of course, means silver in Spanish. So the Río de la Plata, which runs in the estuary at Buenos Aires, got its name not because Argentina was a main producer of silver, but because the river was used to SHIP silver from Perú and Bolivia. Some pompous cocksucker from Yale was trying to tell me a few months back that Argentina was so named because of all the silver mines there. No. There were and are a few silver mines in northwestern Argentina but most of the silver at this time was coming from Potosí in Bolivia. That is where Spain had its mint. Fucken Ivy League twerp. Prior to becoming a separate viceroyalty, the area that roughly became New Granada was a subdivision of the Viceroyalty of Lima and was known as Tierra Firme.

One man's canela is another's caramela, another's morena, and still another's blanquita. I tend to zero in on the color they all share. Pink.

[QUOTE=MrEnternational;2155203]That is funny since it all used to be the same country. I don't think that someone drawing a line and calling part of it a different name would put the people so far off.

So you have been to Colombia and you think the girls are not light enough? My buddy has been to Medellin and he says the girls aren't dark enough. My girlfriend is Colombian and she is white as snow. I think some of y'all have been going to the wrong Colombia.[/QUOTE]

As far as racial / ethnics of Colombians and Venezuelans goes, its the basic people of Spanish, indigineous (Indian), Afro-black mix. Some people in some areas look pure Spanish; other people look to be pure indigineous and others pure black. But there has been so much inter-racial mixing some people look to be of obvious mix of some part of those groups.

Thank you guys. My preconceptions come from the fact that Venezuela has historically been a more affluent country than Colombia and recent history has shown that the more affluent populations have also been the more fair skin people. Also the Venezuelens I know who immigrated to the United States are very fair compared to my Colombian friends.

I also found a bit of variety in complexion between Meddelin, Cali, and Cartagena. I have a work trip to Bagota in May and will see how much has changed in 10 years!

[QUOTE=Combo;2155089]I can confirm there are lots of Venezuelans in Colombia (apparently more in Bogota, Bucaramanga, Cucuta for obvious reasons). What I can't confirm is that they are "fair-skinned" Venezuelans. I don't know if you're aware, but Colombia and Venezuela are very similar countries, including racial/ethnic mix (and it's a good one!).[/QUOTE][QUOTE=MrEnternational;2155203]That is funny since it all used to be the same country. I don't think that someone drawing a line and calling part of it a different name would put the people so far off.

So you have been to Colombia and you think the girls are not light enough? My buddy has been to Medellin and he says the girls aren't dark enough. My girlfriend is Colombian and she is white as snow. I think some of y'all have been going to the wrong Colombia.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Combo;2155440]And out of those five countries, Colombia and Venezuela are (by far) the most similar as far as racial / ethnic mixes and appearance of the women. If one doesn't like the stereotypical Colombian look, he isn't going to like the Venezuelan look and vice versa. This isn't to say there's no variation in looks / complexion within each country. There absolutely is. One can find fair-complexioned Colombianas y Venezuelanas and one can find very dark girls in both countries. But on average, they are very, very similar.[/QUOTE]

The CIA Factbook on countries describes the racial / ethnic mix of Colombia as such (there words): Mestizo and White 84%, Afro-Colombian 10%, Amerindian 3. 4%.

[QUOTE=HasideasTao;2155379]This girl looks very familiar. Used to work at Ejecutivo. Anyone else remember her from there?[/QUOTE]She has worked at Fase II at least since I met her there early Sept last year and didn't see her at Barra Ejectiva in March '17 or June '17. I'll ask her next time we WhatsApp.

She lives in Rio Negro.

[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2154895]Haven't been to Colombia is years as I prefer lighter skin girls. I hear that recently there has been a wave of fair skin Venezuelan WGs in the past year. Is this rumor true?[/QUOTE]Just how light skin are you looking for, my girlie from Fase II is fairly fair I think and so is my SA sweetie Sofie, and even my street girlie Sarah.

[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2154895]Haven't been to Colombia is years as I prefer lighter skin girls. I hear that recently there has been a wave of fair skin Venezuelan WGs in the past year. Is this rumor true?[/QUOTE]The 2 Venezuelan girls I have met in Medellin, neither were super fair skinned, but not very dark either: (Tiffany from Yakusa and Rachel who is 5'11" from Maracaibo).

[QUOTE=BayBoy;2155479]The CIA Factbook on countries describes the racial / ethnic mix of Colombia as such (there words): Mestizo and White 84%, Afro-Colombian 10%, Amerindian 3. 4%.[/QUOTE]

Well, there is a heck of a lot of difference anywhere in LatAm between being 'mestizo' and being 'white,' or 'criollo. ' So by combining those two categories, the CIA Factbook shows that they don't know shit from apple butter. Furthermore, they are way underestimating the indigenous percentage, because they don't know where or how to find all those people. The CIA has been working hand in glove with fascist LatAm governments to exterminate those people for a very long time, so they tend not to stand up and be counted. The 'CIA Factbook' is disgraceful, mendacious propaganda.

To summarize, the CIA 'Fact' Book is a crock of shit.

[QUOTE=BayBoy;2155469]As far as racial / ethnics of Colombians and Venezuelans goes, its the basic people of Spanish, indigineous (Indian), Afro-black mix. Some people in some areas look pure Spanish; other people look to be pure indigineous and others pure black. But there has been so much inter-racial mixing some people look to be of obvious mix of some part of those groups.[/QUOTE]It goes beyond that. The indigenous peoples in Colombia and Venezuela were different from those in say Bolivia, Peru, Mexico, etc. My guess is that they were a more attractive people.

And the Africans brought to various regions of the Americas were also from different parts of the Mother Continent. The mix in Venezuela and Colombia is a particularly good mix. I'd put Brasil to that group also. Although the mix is a bit different - even more diverse.

[QUOTE=Dickhead;2155514]Well, there is a heck of a lot of difference anywhere in LatAm between being 'mestizo' and being 'white,' or 'criollo. ' So by combining those two categories, the CIA Factbook shows that they don't know shit from apple butter. Furthermore, they are way underestimating the indigenous percentage, because they don't know where or how to find all those people. The CIA has been working hand in glove with fascist LatAm governments to exterminate those people for a very long time, so they tend not to stand up and be counted. The 'CIA Factbook' is disgraceful, mendacious propaganda.

To summarize, the CIA 'Fact' Book is a crock of shit.[/QUOTE]Totally agree with you on the "CIA FACT BOOK". A few years ago I was going to West Africa a couple times a year and the 'CIA FACT BOOK" was chocked full of straight up bullshit concerning West Africa. My theory is that the CIA doesn't want people traveling and discovering fantastic alternatives to the plantation (I. E. "1st world" countries).

The CIA is an international terrorist organization run by a bunch of high end thugs, with no oversight or accountability. But we should take any further discussion to Chit Chat so as not to interfere with pussy.

[QUOTE=Dickhead;2155454]Well, no, not really. The vast majority of what is now Per remained in the Viceroyalty of Lima. Some of what is now Per, but was then Ecuador, went to New Granada but that is a very small portion of what is now Per. The initial separation of the Viceroyalty of New Granada from the Viceroyalty of Lima in the early XVIII century was primarily present day Colombia, Venezuela, and Ecuador. Later, Panam, which eventually became part of Colombia, was brought into the Viceroyalty of New Granada. If I recall correctly, it also contained parts of what are now Brazil and Suriname. This was all part of the reforms instituted by the Bourbon Dynasty when the Viceroyalty of Lima became too unwieldy because of growth in the colonies. Eventually there were four viceroyalties before it all went to shit: Lima, New Granada, Ro de la Plata, and New Spain (Mxico and Central Amrica); Panam had been part of New Spain but was eventually incorporated into New Granada, becoming part of Colombia. The respective capitals were Lima, Bogot, Buenos Aires, and Mxico City. Obviously the Viceroyalty of Lima, and the city of Lima, saw its influence diminish when the two new viceroyalties of New Granada and Ro de la Plata were created.

'Argento' means silver in Italian and 'plata,' of course, means silver in Spanish. So the Ro de la Plata, which runs in the estuary at Buenos Aires, got its name not because Argentina was a main producer of silver, but because the river was used to SHIP silver from Per and Bolivia. Some pompous cocksucker from Yale was trying to tell me a few months back that Argentina was so named because of all the silver mines there. No. There were and are a few silver mines in northwestern Argentina but most of the silver at this time was coming from Potos in Bolivia. That is where Spain had its mint. Fucken Ivy League twerp. Prior to becoming a separate viceroyalty, the area that roughly became New Granada was a subdivision of the Viceroyalty of Lima and was known as Tierra Firme.[/QUOTE]I'm going to have to go back to Santa Marta where the final resting place of Simon Bolivar is and demand a refund on that damn tour I took back in 2014. Tour guide should have been more clearer on his facts. Looks like Dickhead is the residential Colombian historian. No arguments from me. LOL

First of all thank you to all of you who have endeavored to enlighten us. Having lived in various places around the world, I know you are right and certain preconceptions about skin tone are usually not valid at all.

And all the evidence I have seen, never having been to either country, is that if anything Colombian girls are on average somewhat more attractive. However more than a handful of people who have traveled extensively in Latin America, swear to me that Venezuelan girls are on average quite a big more attractive than Colombian girls.

When I asked one of them to justify this opinion, he pointed out that Venezuela had far more people of Italian ancestry than Colombia and that was his explanatory variable, I am talking about beauty and not skin tone, this is what I want to explicitly clarify, we admirers of beauty know it occurs throughout the visible spectrum. The relatively high Italian ancestry does occur in Argentina too, and that might be what some people consider very attractive, when I ask observers to articulate what they find particularly attractive about Argentine girls, they are usually at a loss for words.

So two questions.

Does anyone agree that Venezuelan girls generally outshine Colombian girls?

Do you think Italian ancestry has anything to do with it?