am i missing something?

To answer the other part of your question: "Without eyeliner" and "eyeliner-less" are both kind of jokes, because pandas of course don't *actually* wear eyeliner. To me at least, "eyeliner-less" simply sounds funnier.

There's a lot of words that use the suffix "less" to mean "without". Some examples: Careless, witless, shoeless, topless. Eyelinerless isn't really a word and I guess OOP felt that it was easier to read with a space, but it should really be hypenated, eyeliner-less.

It's an informal construction and should really be written as one word, "eyelinerless". Think about words like "useless" or "heartless". These are adjectives formed by taking a noun and adding the suffix "-less" to mean "the state of not having [the noun]". So even though "eyelinerless" isn't a real English word, native speakers can easily understand what it *would* mean if it *was* real, which is "the state of not having any eyeliner on".

"Less" can sometimes be appended as a suffix to make a compound adjective although, grammatically speaking, it would need to be one word or with a hyphen (i.e., "eyeliner-less.") "Eyeliner less" here is ungrammatical. It's important to know that this is slang, of a sort. It's kind of a playful neologism. "Eyeliner-less" isn't a word, although any native speaker would understand the meaning.

[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/less](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/less) See definition 5, adjective suffix.

Should be eyelinerless, which isn’t a common word but that’s a common way of creating a new compound word.

Cute panda

Anyone else think it looks like a baby seal when you ignore its ears?

It's got an added space in when it doesn't need it. Eyelinerless

Saying "pandas without eyeliner" is grammatically correct. But people who are fluent in a language, especially if it's their first language, often break grammar rules in ways that make sense to other fluent speakers but are challenging for language learners. "Eyelinerless" would have made more sense than "eyeliner less", but it grammatically still doesn't make sense.

Proper formation would be "eyeliner-less", where "less" is being used as a suffix, not a standalone word (see: "careless"). These kinds of constructions are very common in informal language, with offer affixes (un-, -able/ible, -fuck-).

your just getting into the differences of how English is correctly spoken and how it is actually spoken its like that in any language their is the text book version and the way people actually speak

please don't try to learn english from these intagram brainrot accounts, 80% of the time the caption has some horrible grammar or awkward phrasing in it. best to avoid

People apply suffixes to where they normally wouldn't be used all the time. It's a feature of colloquial English.

There should be a hyphen. Eyeliner-less.  "Less" as a suffix meaning "without" is pretty common, e.g. hopeless, careless, thoughtless 

We could all debate over the technically correct way to make a new word, or we could acknowledge that people don't usually care about punctuation and grammar in informal settings, like texting a friend or posting on the internet... OP, pandas usually have black around their eyes, but these pandas do not. Hence, eyeliner-less pandas.