|
|
Post by Agrippa on Feb 1, 2006 10:03:13 GMT -5
Ainuids were and are no homogenous group, thats something people have to recognise. Some older anthropologists described them ranging from looking almost "like Nordindids" (what would be quite Europoid) to lighter Australoids...forgot who was it, but can find the quote. I myself am not sure because I have not enough material on them. The Ainuid influence in Japanese is clear though, in the upper class as well and indeed, body hair and beard seems to be a good indicator.
But I agree that some older anthropologists might have gone to far with seeing Europoids. In fact the study on the Olympia team proved that too which showed primarily classic East Asian Mongolid types.
|
|
attis
Full Member
Posts: 249
|
Post by attis on Feb 2, 2006 2:08:12 GMT -5
I will admit many pure Ainu look rather Australoid to me, just lighter and hairier. Many pure Ainu do have light eyes which is interesting for an Asian population to have.
|
|
|
|
Post by human2 on Feb 2, 2006 12:13:37 GMT -5
Ainuids were and are no homogenous group, thats something people have to recognise. Some older anthropologists described them ranging from looking almost "like Nordindids" (what would be quite Europoid) to lighter Australoids...forgot who was it, but can find the quote. I myself am not sure because I have not enough material on them. The Ainuid influence in Japanese is clear though, in the upper class as well and indeed, body hair and beard seems to be a good indicator. But I agree that some older anthropologists might have gone to far with seeing Europoids. In fact the study on the Olympia team proved that too which showed primarily classic East Asian Mongolid types. "Nordsinids" look "Europoid"? The way these terms gets stretched, and I still don't know what a standard "Nordsinid" or "Europoid" look slike. |
|
|
|
Post by human2 on Feb 2, 2006 12:58:53 GMT -5
He looks Caucasoid here:  Actually, he does... LOL... He looks no different from a lot of Asians I know, starting with my relatives, just more symmetrical. I didn't realize symmetry = "Caucasoid". That's the problem with self-victimizing people like you and aroundtheworld, isn't it? as a Cambodian and Filipina. On the one hand you acknowledge that anyone falling in-between these 2 below are "Caucasian"-looking...  , which means on the other hand you'd have to acknowledge, as a Cambodian, that only this can be a real Cambodian: . Now, I know this isn't true, so don't react all emotionally and think I'm trying to down Cambodians again. You can ask around about how I've posted a variety of attractive Cambodians to give the stereotypes of this place a balance. |
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Feb 2, 2006 13:21:04 GMT -5
^^ In that pic he could be caucasoid. If he was caucasoid, he could be Asian. Whats the problem if caucasoid and asian looks overlaps on some individuals.
He is called "caucasoid looking" because he's asian, but could be called asian looking if he was caucasoid. There are many euros who could be asian or asian looking by looks.
|
|
|
|
Post by jam on Feb 2, 2006 13:40:58 GMT -5
I agree, but ONLY in that pic, he didn't look euro in any way otherwise. If anything, I've seen Filipinos with a slightly similar look, actually.
|
|
|
|
Post by human2 on Feb 2, 2006 13:42:55 GMT -5
^^ In that pic he could be caucasoid. If he was caucasoid, he could]/b] be Asian.No he can't. You can say he looks quasi-European. That's about it. Just print out his face in that picture and go out side and compare. He looks about as European as Antonio Banderas looks Asian:  By that standard many European celebs (with higher than average cheek-bones) and regular folks look Asian. I'm just waiting for someone to say Charlize Theron or Brad Pitt looks Asian. I never said there was a problem. I was just talking to aroudntheworld, (no one else, if you notice), who has a "history" of posts that speaks for itself. You just made the point for me, actually. How can he look "Caucasoid" if there is overlap? The problem is double standards, isn't it? with someone like aroundtheworld, who is Asian herself. Now the Europeans with a quasi-"Mongoloid" look all tend to be northern Europeans, the same people who aroundtheworld thinks as "ultra-Caucasoid". |
|
|
|
Post by Agrippa on Feb 2, 2006 19:23:54 GMT -5
Thats the 2nd time it seems you thought I just made a typo (like in the Nordid-Sinid case), but no, its Nordindid = Northern Indid = typical form Sikhs.
Nordsinids are another category and rather typical for Yayoi than Ainuid people...
Typical people are Hwangho-Chinese and Manchuria.
|
|
attis
Full Member
Posts: 249
|
Post by attis on Feb 2, 2006 21:10:55 GMT -5
I always thought Björk looked Asian to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Agrippa on Feb 2, 2006 21:13:29 GMT -5
I always thought Björk looked Asian to me. Yes, to me too. She doesnt look "North Europid" (wider term than Nordid) so to say, might have Mongoloid, in every case AT LEAST Lappoid admixture... |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 2, 2006 21:42:05 GMT -5
What ethnicity is that man? He has a very interesting appearance. |
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Feb 3, 2006 4:56:07 GMT -5
You just made the point for me, actually. How can he look "Caucasoid" if there is overlap? The problem is double standards, isn't it? Well, yes, meaning that, as already said time ago, if A looks like B, B is aoid or A is boid depending if you are a A or a B. It's just another way to say "look like". As also just said, imo beautiful people all follow an universal standard so tend to resemble each other much more than they resemble the uglier of their kin. I'm pretty sure measurements on models would prove they are a "race apart". 100% Northern Italian starlet who looks Asian  Another who could be asian  |
|
|
|
Post by Agrippa on Feb 3, 2006 7:09:04 GMT -5
Thats not really true, though its true that most models have not just some general attractive characteristics, but especially male models are on average significantly more progressive than the average of the population - and generally juvenile-mature body types are obviously preferred.
Some racial types are just closer to progressive facial features and head shape and juvenile-mature (versatile and attractive) body type than others.
Not that much.
|
|
|
|
Post by Agrippa on Feb 3, 2006 7:17:02 GMT -5
Not really. A standard metrical method to determine "Mongolid character" is to measure various angles and general facial relief. So someone with strong facial relief cannot be considered "typical", what doesnt mean he falls out of it.
In a test of that system on prehistoric skulls with a simple method of that kind the failure quote was very low - but it should be pointed out that in a North Eastern European prehistoric population no failure happened compared with the morphological-descriptive method - in the Mongolid population for comparison one mistake happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by human2 on Feb 8, 2006 17:33:44 GMT -5
Not really. A standard metrical method to determine "Mongolid character" is to measure various angles and general facial relief. So someone with strong facial relief cannot be considered "typical", what doesnt mean he falls out of it. Ok, you just defined what is a "Mongoloid"... and what's "not typical". By the same token you have to define what is a "Caucasoid". The problem with you is that you keep defining "Mongoloid" in the most extreme sense ("Tungid") while not doing the same for your side of the world... It would be like me defining "Caucasoid" in the sense of Middle Easterners.. in which case many many people in Europe don't look "Caucasoid"... or are not typical. Do you understand this? It's ok if you use a narrow standard, but it has to be consistant. What you said is very ambiguous. People below Siberia and to the east of it can have facial relief. It doesn't mean they are admixed. What test? Failure as in what? What population were they testing? |
|
