They didn't. If that were true, then Europe would have been colonized by sands.
They didn't conquer all of Europe, but they came uncomfortably close to doing so during the Islamic Golden Age, which as
@Chudpreet quite correctly points out, was them to a substantial degree building upon what a few other civilizations did, but they still mogged during that time, and they de facto dominated a very substantial part of Europe either through direct rule or through dominating independent countries there and basically turning them into their slave-exporting colonies, while the European influence on MENA was very limited.
In fact, for about a thousand years since the conquest of Spain and up until the Ottoman Empire started crumbling and getting dismantled by the newly-industrialized European powers, MENA empires always had a greater military and geopolitical presence in Europe than vice versa. Which is not even talking about the frequent slave raids from those empires targetting coastal and peripheral regions of Europe, which only increased their influence there.
I doubt it makes that much of a difference. Too lazy to check the numbers
I doubt that's the reason. Australian abos look ugly as sin but I'm sure they didn't look ugly to themselves until they were exposed to a completely different society and standards. It's more of a learned behaviour than you think.
Different people born in different cultures would obviously think differently. Again the overlap with race is only correlational. I don't see how a third generation immigrant in America would act anything other than an American all because of his race (now that I think about it it's a bad example considering American culture forces racial behaviours upon its consituents)
It's funny that it's Indians of all people who are pulling out this bs considering race was not even a thing in Indian society.
We know that there is very high agreement between different, even wildly different cultures, on who is attractive and who isn't, but how much that translates into an objective ranking of different races which many people here promote is still rather unknown.
We have a lot of very indirect stuff like Tinder reply rates and such, but there are very few studies which actually compare how the same person is rated across cultures and other metrics that can't be explained by, say, men of some races being seen as more appealing potential betabuxxers and such.
One of those that actually does that has the dataset free for download, and when you compare how the five best and worst looking men out of the 80 in the study did in the various countries, including India and two African countries, while there were some differences, overall the two groups' looks level remained mostly the same, with the Chads having much more variation between them than the incels did.
Research on the perception of faces typically assumes that there are some universal values of attractiveness which are shared across individuals and cultures. The perception of attractiveness may, however, vary across cultures due to local differences in both facial morphology and standards of...
journals.plos.org
