D
TDLR: I am not an East Asian-supremacist in that I believe my race is superior in just about every respect to other races, but relative to most users in this forum you could essentially describe me as one. In regards to particular aspects such as eye colour diversity, hair colour diversity, eye shape, certain aesthetic qualities, I admit that the Europeans are sometimes superior in these regards. In other ways, vice versa. All in all, I believe Europeans and East Asians are somewhat superior to that of other races.
Before I explain my theory, here is the background facts supporting my assertions:
1. M*ngoloid vs Caucasoid mandible mass.
The M*ngoloid subjects were found to have approximately 20% higher bone density at the angle of mandible than Caucasoid subjects (P = 0.0094 for males, P = 0.0004 for females). Race is the most important variable associated with bone density. M*ngoloid subjects should be given a higher exposure for panoramic radiography than that normally used for Caucasoid subjects.
2. East asian facial structure
“High cheekbones and a distinct mandibular contour characterise the appearance of East Asian persons, especially those of Korean and Japanese descent...However, because of the more delicate topography of the typical Asian face**, zygomas and mandibular angles that are overly prominent upset the balance, rendering the face overly flat, wide, and square**.”
3. Facial widths of ethnicities
"...High cheek bones or a projecting zygoma is strongly associated with Asians. The projecting cheek bones render the appearance of a flat face as well as narrow and oblique eyes (Hamilton, 2008). Very flat faces in the transverse plane are the most common condition in Eastern Asians, especially in North East Asians (Japan and Koreans) (Hanihara, 2000). "
(Zygoma is cheekbones btw)
4. East Asians have higher average Cranial indexes and are more likely to be brachycephal. More on the link below:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/aznidentity/comments/mtnor2/the_robust_asian_man_part_1_the_warrior_skull/
My own personal theory is that Germanics, Slavs and other Europeans who uncoincidentally share more East Asian genetics (see below) are always surprisingly deemed more attractive to other Europeans for this reason. This may sound inconvenient to some, but there is plenty of evidence supporting it:
1. For context, Anglo-Saxons were originally Germanic-related and migrated to Britain from what is modern-day Germany, to establish their culture there which later became known as Anglo-Saxon culture. Who do you think is more aesthetically superior: between the Celts, Welsh, Native brittonic tribes, and the Anglo-Saxons upon first arrival? My best guess would be that most people would say the Germanic group, as did later nations who took this worship of features to another extreme.
The Western powers even had a racial epithet for German-origin peoples: Squarehead is a late 19th century ethnic slur directed at German and Scandinavian immigrants. The phrase is meant quite literally as a disparaging reference to the cranial features, though often just used as a generic ethnic slur against those groups.
Furthermore, it was a well-observed fact from ancient times until now that, the further North or East you travel in Europe, the greater frequencies of high-set, prominent-cheekbones, positive canthal tilt, square jaws and hooded eyes you will see in the native populations
Note how Italians, Canadians, White Americans, Spanish, Anglo-Saxons and other whites with little to no mongoloid admixture are far more likely to have negative-canthal tilt, lower-set cheekbones and large, crooked noses. East Asians, on the other hand, are blessed with graceful yet robust noses, smaller at the root.
Another key point in my theory is that: "Europeans are actually a mix between East Asians and native Caucasoids. If you want to see "pure" caucasoids, look at Middle Easterners, Arabs, and Jews".
It actually makes sense if you think about it: Why do Nordic peoples' noses generally look more like this:
Whereas Arabs, Jews, and Middle Easterners (Caucasoids who uncoincidentally have no mongoloid admixture) generally have noses that look like this?:
Not to mention, why do Jews always have recessed jaws, at least compared to Europeans?
There can be no other explanation other than the one backed by scientific fact, that many of their traits were inherited from ancient EA ancestors as a result of thousands of years of invasions: Huns, Magyars, Mongols, Finns, e.t.c.
I have a question for those challenging this view: if Europe had only one option, that only one of the races listed below gets granted the entire territory of Europe and could miscegenate the local population to produce a future hybrid race of mixed-race children, between Middle Easterners (Arabs), South Asians (Indians, Pakistanis), East Asians (Chinese, Japanese), or Black Africans (negroids), which race would you pick and why?
My best bet that the answer would be East Asians. The only two races in history that have made and are capable of making history great.
Before I explain my theory, here is the background facts supporting my assertions:
1. M*ngoloid vs Caucasoid mandible mass.
The M*ngoloid subjects were found to have approximately 20% higher bone density at the angle of mandible than Caucasoid subjects (P = 0.0094 for males, P = 0.0004 for females). Race is the most important variable associated with bone density. M*ngoloid subjects should be given a higher exposure for panoramic radiography than that normally used for Caucasoid subjects.
2. East asian facial structure
“High cheekbones and a distinct mandibular contour characterise the appearance of East Asian persons, especially those of Korean and Japanese descent...However, because of the more delicate topography of the typical Asian face**, zygomas and mandibular angles that are overly prominent upset the balance, rendering the face overly flat, wide, and square**.”
3. Facial widths of ethnicities
"...High cheek bones or a projecting zygoma is strongly associated with Asians. The projecting cheek bones render the appearance of a flat face as well as narrow and oblique eyes (Hamilton, 2008). Very flat faces in the transverse plane are the most common condition in Eastern Asians, especially in North East Asians (Japan and Koreans) (Hanihara, 2000). "
(Zygoma is cheekbones btw)
4. East Asians have higher average Cranial indexes and are more likely to be brachycephal. More on the link below:
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/aznidentity/comments/mtnor2/the_robust_asian_man_part_1_the_warrior_skull/
My own personal theory is that Germanics, Slavs and other Europeans who uncoincidentally share more East Asian genetics (see below) are always surprisingly deemed more attractive to other Europeans for this reason. This may sound inconvenient to some, but there is plenty of evidence supporting it:
1. For context, Anglo-Saxons were originally Germanic-related and migrated to Britain from what is modern-day Germany, to establish their culture there which later became known as Anglo-Saxon culture. Who do you think is more aesthetically superior: between the Celts, Welsh, Native brittonic tribes, and the Anglo-Saxons upon first arrival? My best guess would be that most people would say the Germanic group, as did later nations who took this worship of features to another extreme.
The Western powers even had a racial epithet for German-origin peoples: Squarehead is a late 19th century ethnic slur directed at German and Scandinavian immigrants. The phrase is meant quite literally as a disparaging reference to the cranial features, though often just used as a generic ethnic slur against those groups.
Furthermore, it was a well-observed fact from ancient times until now that, the further North or East you travel in Europe, the greater frequencies of high-set, prominent-cheekbones, positive canthal tilt, square jaws and hooded eyes you will see in the native populations
Note how Italians, Canadians, White Americans, Spanish, Anglo-Saxons and other whites with little to no mongoloid admixture are far more likely to have negative-canthal tilt, lower-set cheekbones and large, crooked noses. East Asians, on the other hand, are blessed with graceful yet robust noses, smaller at the root.
Another key point in my theory is that: "Europeans are actually a mix between East Asians and native Caucasoids. If you want to see "pure" caucasoids, look at Middle Easterners, Arabs, and Jews".
It actually makes sense if you think about it: Why do Nordic peoples' noses generally look more like this:
Whereas Arabs, Jews, and Middle Easterners (Caucasoids who uncoincidentally have no mongoloid admixture) generally have noses that look like this?:
Not to mention, why do Jews always have recessed jaws, at least compared to Europeans?
There can be no other explanation other than the one backed by scientific fact, that many of their traits were inherited from ancient EA ancestors as a result of thousands of years of invasions: Huns, Magyars, Mongols, Finns, e.t.c.
I have a question for those challenging this view: if Europe had only one option, that only one of the races listed below gets granted the entire territory of Europe and could miscegenate the local population to produce a future hybrid race of mixed-race children, between Middle Easterners (Arabs), South Asians (Indians, Pakistanis), East Asians (Chinese, Japanese), or Black Africans (negroids), which race would you pick and why?
My best bet that the answer would be East Asians. The only two races in history that have made and are capable of making history great.
