Farmers from Mississippi

[hangh]

Classify these farmers from Mississippi:

119915

119916

119917

119918

119919

119920

119921

119922

119923

119924

[Occiput in Starlight]

A more talented member will classify et passify.

I just wanted to write how I've always liked Southerners' clothing.

The heartland knows how to dress itself.

[Oliver109]

These look like proper Americans, borrebies, paleo atlantids, atlantids, tronders

[hangh]

Bump

[aherne]

White people, farmers in particular, there are overwhelmingly British Isles (old stock colonial descent). In last 400 years they developed their own look, though... I don't find them that similar to English people I saw in London: they are more brunet for sure. Overall, most similar to Scots.

[hangh]

White people, farmers in particular, there are overwhelmingly British Isles (old stock colonial descent). In last 400 years they developed their own look, though... I don't find them that similar to English people I saw in London: they are more brunet for sure. Overall, most similar to Scots.

In Mississippi, they tend to be British and Irish with some French elements. Italian is a mild feature near the Gulf. Creole ancestry is common along the Gulf Coast, and many whites have some trace of old Spanish ancestry in this region, as well as some distant Black.

[Nurzat]

big-boned.

on average heavier than any European population average.

in facial traits as well, square wide faces.

also, they look painfully American, haha

[hangh]

big-boned.

on average heavier than any European population average.

in facial traits as well, square wide faces.

also, they look painfully American, haha

No, they are obviously not heavier than nearly any European population's average. That's just a blatant lie. Most of the farmers pictured were average weight or skinny, with some overweight couples.

You can easily find pictures of rural Czechs, who look about as heavy on average, but also much less fit and attractive:

123905

123904
(pardon the blurriness)

123912

You can also see the dysgenic faces of the European population are much more hideous - a horribly asymmetrical quality, slight features, awkwardly proportioned:

123907

123906

123911



Those Mississippi farmers are just objectively more attractive looking than the European average, and most are visibly leaner and fitter than the European equivalents so pictured here. You have an inferiority complex vis a vis Americans.

It's notable that even the heavier Mississippi couples pictured look a lot more symmetrical and less dysgenic than the people pictured above. Everyone looks healthier and fitter.

These pictures represent that contrast quite vividly:

123909

123910

123908

[masoebu]

I wonder whether it's true that white Americans tend to have more harmonious/refined facial features. Also more pedomorphic tendencies. Cause I've lived here all of my life there seems to be a distinct set of white American looks I'm familiar with.

Perhaps this refinement of facial features is actually degeneration and dilution rather than progression?

[zueira]

In Mississippi, they tend to be British and Irish with some French elements. Italian is a mild feature near the Gulf. Creole ancestry is common along the Gulf Coast, and many whites have some trace of old Spanish ancestry in this region, as well as some distant Black.
Irish= British

[hangh]

I wonder whether it's true that white Americans tend to have more harmonious/refined facial features. Also more pedomorphic tendencies. Cause I've lived here all of my life there seems to be a distinct set of white American looks I'm familiar with.

Perhaps this refinement of facial features is actually degeneration and dilution rather than progression?

So, you’re not being serious? “Pedomorphic tendencies”?

And no, symmetrical faces are a product of hybrid vigor. Inbreeding is more common in any given European country than in the US. Do you have a deep seated bias against Americans or something?

[hangh]

Irish= British

Uh, no. They’re distinct ethnicities with distinct phenotypes. They’re relative similarity vs other groups is highlighted by “and”.

[Davystayn]

Take the hats off and change the clothes and they fit anywhere in any pub on this side of the pond, just bigger boned prob as a result of a fuller diet with more meat.

Btw are Americans the only culture that wear hats indoors? Southern US culture and dress is still cool.

[zueira]

Uh, no. They’re distinct ethnicities with distinct phenotypes. They’re relative similarity vs other groups is highlighted by “and”.

is it a joke? British and Irish are identical

[Albannach]

Most look quite foreign to my Scottish eyes, and would stand out here. they look distinctly American, but if I had to place them anywhere in Europe it would be the Netherlands or Germany.

[earthling1]

Americans seem more Alpinized than Europeans. Due to Amerindian mixture maybe

[masoebu]

So, you’re not being serious? “Pedomorphic tendencies”?

And no, symmetrical faces are a product of hybrid vigor. Inbreeding is more common in any given European country than in the US. Do you have a deep seated bias against Americans or something?

Let me rephrase that, the American looks I'm familiar with tend to be more reduced it seems.

But I suppose this is happening in all industrialized nations given the jaw shrinkage epidemic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_jaw_shrinkage

[Smeagol]

Americans seem more Alpinized than Europeans. Due to Amerindian mixture maybe

No, it's due to excess weight. Have you ever seen what the Indians who lived in the eastern United States looked like? Because they are in no way similar to Alpines.

[earthling1]

No, it's due to excess weight. Have you ever seen what the Indians who lived in the eastern United States looked like? Because they are in no way similar to Alpines.

So what's your theory on why Americans have less robust features than Europeans and Brits especially outside of the North-East area

[hangh]

So what's your theory on why Americans have less robust features than Europeans and Brits especially outside of the North-East area

Gracile features in the US are especially concentrated in the Northeast, where “French-Italian” genetics are the most common. In a relative sense, all celticized and mediterranid peoples in Europe today have more significantly more gracile features in comparison to Americans, who are much more significantly German and hybridized with other ancestries. Maybe robust isn't the right term, but "symmetrical"? I think "robust" describes the distinguishing aspect between the populations that I'm looking for, though.

Many American men from the Midwest, for example, have reduced Cromagnid, hybridized appearances, whereas most Europeans who have Cromagnid appearances are noticeably less hybridized and less symmetrical, and more fully Cromagnid. Is this what is meant by "robust" vs otherwise?

Also, um, none of the Mississippians pictured really look Alpinized at all. The round faced gracile look is far more common in Britain and Europe than it is in the U.S. Let’s be real here.

Americans have hybrid vigor in general, as do other new worlders. Natives don’t have “alpinized” appearances, they are known for robust, endomorphic phenotypes continent-wide, and typically have asiatic eyes. There is minimal relevant Native admixture in any of the American white population (it’s more notable in Canadians), and it’s visible in a grand total of 0 people in the sample pictures. The regions native admixture is most notable in are rural locations, particularly in the Southern Plains and South Central regions of the country.

Imagine calling Midwesterners and Plainsians "less robust" than Europeans (especially the Brits, Spanish, or French - what?):

123987 123984 124013

123988 123985 123989

123993 123990 123991

123992

These are all examples of younger people from the Midwest. They would be viewed as average White Americans. Can you please identify the alpinized theme here? I'm not seeing it at all.

British men seem to look different from American men, with the guys on the top having distinctly British phenotypes and the guys on the bottom more American ones - they don't look British:

124007 124006

vs.

124005 124004 124003

I don't know, maybe I'm using the wrong terminology. How would you characterize the American faces presented here, are they not robust? Where do you see "Alpinization" in these faces?

[hangh]

Let me rephrase that, the American looks I'm familiar with tend to be more reduced it seems.

But I suppose this is happening in all industrialized nations given the jaw shrinkage epidemic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_jaw_shrinkage

The American looks you’re familiar with will conform to your biases.

Americans tend to have more symmetrical faces than Europeans do, as do other New Worlders.

[hangh]

is it a joke? British and Irish are identical

No, they’re not. They’re similar, not identical

[hangh]

Americans seem more Alpinized than Europeans. Due to Amerindian mixture maybe

Also, for further reference, these are some notable Amerindian admixed Americans:

124010 124009

124008 124011

Wes Welker has distant Cherokee ancestry, he does not look remotely "Alpinized":

124012

[earthling1]

I mean you don't see the Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron faces once you leave NorthEast USA. They look more European because their features are more robust, as in noses are more aquiline, eye sockets are deeper, eyes are bigger. More closely resembling the statue of David. These farmer guys seem less robust than the average Western European guy.
As an eg, Donald Trump seems much less robust facially than Prince Philip.

[hangh]

Duplicate

[hangh]

I mean you don't see the Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron faces once you leave NorthEast USA. They look more European because their features are more robust, as in noses are more aquiline, eye sockets are deeper, eyes are bigger. More closely resembling the statue of David. These farmer guys seem less robust than the average Western European guy.
As an eg, Donald Trump seems much less robust facially than Prince Philip.

Neither Justin Trudeau or Emmanuel Macron could be described as “robust” looking, and neither resemble “the statue of David”. Robust features mean more than “acquiline noses” and “big eyes”. “Robust”, casually, often means a pronounced brow or heavy jawline. Macron is known for having relatively gracile, reduced features. Donald Trump’s features are shifted by plastic surgery and don’t remotely look average.

Boris Johnson looks like a more reduced-CM Trump. Someone like Gerald Ford is no less representative of Americans, facially, and you wouldn’t remotely call his looks “less robust” - his looks are clearly more robust than Philip’s. Ditto JFK. Jr’s. Ronald Reagan is an example of a gracile looking man. FDR and his son are mixed, more robust looking.

Plenty of the farmers in these pictures look pretty indistinguishable from Trudeau and Macron, phenotypically. The ones that don’t look “robust” and Germanic.

I left you an entire set of pictures of white Midwestern Americans and mixed Natives and you ignored them. Could you tell me what you glean from those pictures? What phenotypes you spot? Where your alleged “alpinization” is? Alpinized, gracile looks are far more common in Europe than the U.S. All of the mixed Native Americans I showed you look very robust, bar one.

[hangh]

I mean you don't see the Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron faces once you leave NorthEast USA. They look more European because their features are more robust, as in noses are more aquiline, eye sockets are deeper, eyes are bigger. More closely resembling the statue of David. These farmer guys seem less robust than the average Western European guy.
As an eg, Donald Trump seems much less robust facially than Prince Philip.

I'm also confused by your fixation on "the northeast USA"? This is so strange - Claiming that you don't see faces like Justin Trudeau's in the Midwest is odd, and I'm not sure why you would so brazenly just state that, given you don't live in the USA. You have plenty of white Americans in the Midwest with French and French-Canadian ancestry who look a ton like Trudeau, like this Hockey player I went to school with:

124021

Claiming you don't see faces like Macron (who is not robust at all) in the Midwest or in the US "outside the Northeast" is just dumb. HOW is this "robust"?:

124022

Midwestern, Southern, and Western regions obviously conform to robust beauty standards, more so than the Northeast. Many crowd photos from the region immediately display this:

124030 124027 124028 124029

124031 124032 124033

All of those actors/models are from the more rural Midwest and South + California (which received a lot of Midwestern immigration).

[masoebu]

The American looks you’re familiar with will conform to your biases.

Americans tend to have more symmetrical faces than Europeans do, as do other New Worlders.

symmetrical? I think white people in general tend to have symmetrical faces but I don't know how you would measure that across populations to say one is more symmetrical than another on average.

For what it's worth where I live most whites are overwhelmingly North Euro.

[hangh]

symmetrical? I think white people in general tend to have symmetrical faces but I don't know how you would measure that across populations to say one is more symmetrical than another on average.

For what it's worth where I live most whites are overwhelmingly North Euro.

No, they don't.

[Ruggery]

I think for this population to have a lot of British ancestry they still look phenotypically very different from native British people.

[aherne]

I think for this population to have a lot of British ancestry they still look phenotypically very different from native British people.

Surnames and ancestry estimates show that whites in that impoverished region are almost entirely British (heavily English) in ancestry, but 400 years of separation have created their own, more Germanic looks. Still, these are normal faces you see every day among Londoners, nothing unusual...

[Boudin]

How would you characterize the American faces presented here, are they not robust? Where do you see "Alpinization" in these faces?

People playing sports look more robust than their population average. This is based on my own experience using them for face morphs. I would not use them as an example of a population's phenotype.

[Creoda]

Surnames and ancestry estimates show that whites in that impoverished region are almost entirely British (heavily English) in ancestry, but 400 years of separation have created their own, more Germanic looks. Still, these are normal faces you see every day among Londoners, nothing unusual...
More German ≠ more Germanic.

[hangh]

People playing sports look more robust than their population average. This is based on my own experience using them for face morphs. I would not use them as an example of a population's phenotype.

Not really. There are plenty of NFL players, baseball players, hockey players, etc, who have decidedly un-robust faces. Wrestlers seem to be somewhat different, they often have very Cromagnid faces for some reason, almost like it's the result of their sport.

[hangh]

Surnames and ancestry estimates show that whites in that impoverished region are almost entirely British (heavily English) in ancestry, but 400 years of separation have created their own, more Germanic looks. Still, these are normal faces you see every day among Londoners, nothing unusual...

Haha, Mississippi isn't really "Impoverished" relative to impoverished places in Europe.

[hangh]

Surnames and ancestry estimates show that whites in that impoverished region are almost entirely British (heavily English) in ancestry, but 400 years of separation have created their own, more Germanic looks. Still, these are normal faces you see every day among Londoners, nothing unusual...


More German ≠ more Germanic.

Imo, they don't look fully Germanic. Re-scanning these pictures, a lot of the faces on display are more gracilized than that, I'm noticing a complete lack of hooked noses, for example. They look kind of like the Dutch, or the French. Maybe Swiss approximates these faces well. Americans are known to have ancestry from Grisons, latently, and this would balance the gracile and the robust aspects I'm noticing in these farmers.

The two blonde women in the last pic are hard to place. They look more continental, but I couldn't place them specifically.

[Boudin]

Not really. There are plenty of NFL players, baseball players, hockey players, etc, who have decidedly un-robust faces.

Of course there are plenty with un-robust faces. But on average, they are still more robust than the general population.


Wrestlers seem to be somewhat different, they often have very Cromagnid faces for some reason, almost like it's the result of their sport.

Maybe due to steroids (this may partly explain the case of sports teams too) although a Cromagnid face is obviously more suitable for getting punched in the nose than a pure Nordid.

[Gallop]

Women seem to have a more British trace or essence than men.

[hangh]

Of course there are plenty with un-robust faces. But on average, they are still more robust than the general population.

I don't really believe this. They come from the general population. This is just too vague/general a deliberation. How many portions of society do you need to exclude before you're only cherry-picking 65+ yo people or younger kids for this to be true? You could claim that "robust phenoypes" are more common among police officers, firemen, members of the military, prisoners, construction workers, even some business and white collar professions.

[andrzej]

White people, farmers in particular, there are overwhelmingly British Isles (old stock colonial descent). In last 400 years they developed their own look, though... I don't find them that similar to English people I saw in London: they are more brunet for sure. Overall, most similar to Scots.
If you travel through places like Mississippi, you'll soon realize there are many types that are clearly admixtured..

[Smeagol]

If you travel through places like Mississippi, you'll soon realize there are many types that are clearly admixtured..

Admixtured with what?

[hangh]

If you travel through places like Mississippi, you'll soon realize there are many types that are clearly admixtured..


Admixtured with what?

Obviously Black/Native. He's right that there's a Creolization of the population in parts of the South, and particularly Mississippi/the Gulf Coast, who aren't counted as Black but have some racial admixture, even if it's just trace.

[Smeagol]

Obviously Black/Native. He's right that there's a Creolization of the population in parts of the South, and particularly Mississippi/the Gulf Coast, who aren't counted as Black but have some racial admixture, even if it's just trace.

You're retarded.

[hangh]

You're retarded.

Are you seriously that sensitive to any accurate suggestion that a certain amount of racial admixture defines a region historically populated by large amounts of people of two different races?

I understand that the national rate of white-black admixture in White Americans on average is 1-2%, but it's still notable, particularly in the South among white residents with old stock ancestry, and particularly in states like Mississippi. Getting offended every time this is brought up is just insane. It's like you're sensitive to remotely any suggestion that the US doesn't have the ethno-racial demographics and history of a European ethnostate or a place without a major racial minority group (a la Australia).

[hangh]

No, it's due to excess weight. Have you ever seen what the Indians who lived in the eastern United States looked like? Because they are in no way similar to Alpines.

These photos don't represent "excess weight" in the population. I easily accessed photos of fatter crowds in the Czech Republic and the Netherlands from the 2000s and the 2010s in an earlier post, if you didn't see it. Are they "Alpinized"? Do they get a pass because they're European? You seem blind to excess weight in European populations and hyper-aware of it in any photo of Americans, even to the extent that you'll imagine it where it doesn't exist. Multiple threads of GB news presenters and European, British, Canadian, and Australian farmers, politicians, and other individuals show plenty more people of extreme weight than appears in these pictures of Mississippi farmers. You see a few overweight individuals here, but tons of average weight and a handful of skinny and fit looking people in these photos as well. Are you passing over those? It's nothing more extreme than the Western average, particularly for rural people in a poorer area.

[hangh]

Americans seem more Alpinized than Europeans. Due to Amerindian mixture maybe

Are you going to respond to any of my posts? You were caught making stuff up, and made assured statements about the USA, like how common certain phenotypes were per region, that were obviously wrong and backwards. Then you seemed to try to subtly insult Americans by bringing up Donald Trump as any kind of average.

Europeans are almost certainly more alpinized than Americans, and clearly look it.

Amerindian admixture doesn't give an alpinized appearance, and it isn't relevant to the White American phenotype.

[Smeagol]

Are you seriously that sensitive to any accurate suggestion that a certain amount of racial admixture defines a region historically populated by large amounts of people of two different races?

I understand that the national rate of white-black admixture in White Americans on average is 1-2%, but it's still notable, particularly in the South among white residents with old stock ancestry, and particularly in states like Mississippi. Getting offended every time this is brought up is just insane. It's like you're sensitive to remotely any suggestion that the US doesn't have the ethno-racial demographics and history of a European ethnostate or a place without a major racial minority group (a la Australia).

You are so clueless. Stop pretending to be "Germano-Celtic."

[earthling1]

Are you going to respond to any of my posts? You were caught making stuff up, and made assured statements about the USA, like how common certain phenotypes were per region, that were obviously wrong and backwards. Then you seemed to try to subtly insult Americans by bringing up Donald Trump as any kind of average.

Europeans are almost certainly more alpinized than Americans, and clearly look it.

Amerindian admixture doesn't give an alpinized appearance, and it isn't relevant to the White American phenotype.

Hey i have no idea why Americans look Alpinized. Smaller eyes, fleshier face. Go to the South and it's quite common. A sort of pudgy look. Imagine a lumberjack.
In your first post, last picture, the guy on the right of the screen is a good eg of this Alpine look. People in the NorthEast (and to some extent the Midwest blue states) tend to look more North Atlantid (more prominent features). Maybe they're relatively new immigrants so look more European.
You could say that the South is full of British stock, but they don't look quite the same. It would be a question for the Brits here.

[hangh]

Hey i have no idea why Americans look Alpinized. Smaller eyes, fleshier face. A sort of pudgy look. Imagine a lumberjack.

Are you trolling? You don't even attempt to sound objective here.

Alpinization is the definitive trait of the European continent. Europeans and Brits have rounder, fleshier features than Americans. Europeans today, and new immigrants to America, are softer-featured. White Europeans have more body fat per the same BMI than do white Americans. They have less muscle mass on average. They don't have hybrid vigor like white Americans do.

Americans, especially in the Midwest, have more angular, prominent features than Europeans due to Germanic, hybridized appearances. This is old, not new, heritage. Americans look different from Europeans because they're more robust.

There is no "pudgy" look in those Southerner's faces. There is a pudgy look in British faces, a la:

124140 124141 124142 124143 124144

These are FAR pudgier, rounder, softer featured and more gracile-looking than ANY of those photos of Mississippi farmers. In fact, these faces are far more gracile than those you see in any American state on a regular basis.

Again, you seem to have ignored my photographic evidence because it conflicts with your bias, and your attempt to pretend that actually Europeans are the rugged, angle-faced hybrid chads that obviously have the more robust looks and builds - because they eat so much red meat and live in such a harsh climate, right? It's just so laughable and backwards, and anyone who actually knows the first thing about Midwestern/American stereotypes vs British ones knows Americans are more robust. You could cherry-pick any photo of people with distant American ancestry:

124154 124153 124152 124151124149 124150 124145 124147 124146

You also keep claiming that "mixed Amerindian ancestry" produces alpinized appearances, and it doesn't. Most mixed men of that nature are robust. Besides, this is a statistically negligible element of the US population, and is more common in Canadians, as you've been told.


In your first post, last picture, the guy on the right of the screen is a good eg of this Alpine look

...no, it isn't. The man has relatively neutral features, bar your comment about "small eyes". The man sitting directly next to him is extremely robust, as is the man sitting across from him and the three women at the table. All of them have angular features bar the one man you highlighted.


Go to the South and it's quite common

I just find it hilarious that you are obviously lying to cope with your inferiority complex about Americans looking more robust than British people, but then you make statements like this...as if you've been to the south, and as if anyone who has spent time viewing footage of Americans from the heartland and the west (Brock Lesnar, Cael Sanderson, Pat Tillman would like a word) wouldn't immediately laugh at your attempts to pretend people from the South, Midwest, and West are smaller statured with slighter features than Europeans. They're not. That's backwards. Did you ignore all of the pictures in the two posts I first responded to you with?

You literally tried to call Emmanuel Macron "robust". He is the exact opposite of that. Either your notions about certain phenotypes are backwards, or you're trying to shoehorn some projectionist insult into this, which I think is more likely, given your use of terms like "pudgy", your attempt to ignore overwhelming evidence and common sense presented to you, your attempt to declare truths about regions of the US you are clearly unfamiliar with, and your invocation of "Donald Trump" (a highly politicized figure and the target of anti-Americanism in Europe) as any kind of American facial average.

I'd like a response to this post as well please. Are you going to level with my explanations, photographic evidence, and responses, or are you just going to be a biased troll and continue to project European phenotypic reality onto Americans.

[hangh]

Hey i have no idea why Americans look Alpinized. Smaller eyes, fleshier face. Go to the South and it's quite common. A sort of pudgy look. Imagine a lumberjack.
In your first post, last picture, the guy on the right of the screen is a good eg of this Alpine look. People in the NorthEast (and to some extent the Midwest blue states) tend to look more North Atlantid (more prominent features). Maybe they're relatively new immigrants so look more European.
You could say that the South is full of British stock, but they don't look quite the same. It would be a question for the Brits here.

Henry Cavill would be an example of a British man with some continental ancestry who is especially robust for the UK, in fact, he's one of the most robust looking people to come out of the UK in recent media history, and yet his features are slighter and milder than a vast plethora of Americans from the Midwest/West/South. It's not even a question that Americans are more robust than Europeans.

Again, I ask you - did the people depicted below come from a predominantly "Alpinized", "pudgy", small eyed, "fleshier" population? No. They didn't. All of those words describe the British and European population far more, you're just projecting that onto Americans because you're insecure:

124157 124155 124156

Note, you can see some men who look like this in parts of Germanic Europe - where Americans get a good bulk of their ancestry from.

[andrzej]

Are you seriously that sensitive to any accurate suggestion that a certain amount of racial admixture defines a region historically populated by large amounts of people of two different races?

I understand that the national rate of white-black admixture in White Americans on average is 1-2%, but it's still notable, particularly in the South among white residents with old stock ancestry, and particularly in states like Mississippi. Getting offended every time this is brought up is just insane. It's like you're sensitive to remotely any suggestion that the US doesn't have the ethno-racial demographics and history of a European ethnostate or a place without a major racial minority group (a la Australia).

I didn't want to say it because I knew he'd be triggered, but it's quite clear in a lot of southern whites. It's the same as most people in the Americas, you have a lot of these types that may be "white" but "new world white," the thing is a lot of Americans don't realize it because they're used to seeing such appearances if they're just sort of off. It's the same in Canada, there are many Anglo (not even scratching French) Canadians I've met who'd be called Castizo if they were from Latin America, I've noticed that with a lot of Maritimers coming here and people in Central/Western Canada.

Also, the South has a history of absorbing black people and natives into their population, so why is this even shocking?


Although racial segregation was adopted legally by southern states of the former Confederacy in the late 19th century, legislators resisted defining race by law as part of preventing interracial marriages. In 1895, in South Carolina during discussion, George D. Tillman said,

It is a scientific fact that there is not one full-blooded Caucasian on the floor of this convention. Every member has in him a certain mixture of ... colored blood ... It would be a cruel injustice and the source of endless litigation, of scandal, horror, feud, and bloodshed to undertake to annul or forbid marriage for a remote, perhaps obsolete trace of Negro blood. The doors would be open to scandal, malice, and greed.

[hangh]

I didn't want to say it because I knew he'd be triggered

Also, the South has a history of absorbing black people and natives into their population, so why is this even shocking?

Smeagol gets unbelievably triggered at any suggestion that the US isn't just short of Iceland, demographically. It's kind of insane to me.

I've pointed out how AfAm admixture in what is defined as the modern American White European population is typically significant (of course, relative to Europe and places like Canada, Argentina, Australia) but quite distant, often only appearing as trace ancestry on the likes of 23andme genetic testing. This mixing became somewhat less common for much of the 20th century, but colonial to 19th century mixing wasn't that uncommon, and it produced a mixed population notable enough to make a dent into what the One Drop policy fashioned as the modern "Black" population - virtually all of this population has significant European admixture - that obviously came from somewhere.

Native admixture is slightly less common in this region, though it's still somewhat relevant - both are not overwhelmingly present by any means, but it's safe to say that Mississippi is a relatively racially mixed place no matter what angle you look at it from. Denying this is just a refusal of basic fact, lol. In the 20th century, families often told stories of Cherokee ancestry to hide their black heritage. You can't describe Mississippi's ethnic heritage without mentioning a racially mixed/creole element.

[Smeagol]

I didn't want to say it because I knew he'd be triggered, but it's quite clear in a lot of southern whites.

23andMe have already averaged their American results and found that only around 2% are more than 1% nigger. You can't argue with genetic facts. None of the farmers in the first post look in any way colored.


Also, the South has a history of absorbing black people and natives into their population

When? It's the opposite. Any mulattoes married into the colored population. It was not socially acceptable for it to be the other way around.

[Smeagol]

Smeagol gets unbelievably triggered at any suggestion that the US isn't just short of Iceland, demographically. It's kind of insane to me.

It's impressive how you manage to be wrong in nearly every statement you make, but to make clear first of all, Mississippi is not just the Gulf Coast. The Delta is not the Gulf. The Hill Country is not the Gulf. You are not familiar with Mississippi and it shows. I doubt you've ever spent time there.

[Kess]

nigger.

I dare you to say that word in a Black neighborhood.

[Smeagol]

I dare you to say that word in a Black neighborhood.

I'm guessing you're very young. Your generation doesn't seem to be able to handle words very well. Or anything else for that matter.

[Kess]

I'm guessing you're very young. Your generation doesn't seem to be able to handle words very well. Or anything else for that matter.

Honestly, I find it confusing that in today's America, it's considered taboo for a white person to use the N-word. While there are derogatory terms for poor whites, none seem to carry the same level of societal condemnation as the N-word. It's an interesting aspect of dynamics in American culture. Black people use the N-word all the time, but when a white person does, it's an outrage.

[Smeagol]

Honestly, I find it confusing that in today's America, it's considered taboo for a white person to use the N-word. While there are derogatory terms for poor whites, none seem to carry the same level of societal condemnation as the N-word. It's an interesting aspect of dynamics in American culture. Black people use the N-word all the time, but when a white person does, it's an outrage.

It's because darkies always need something to complain about.

[hangh]

23andMe have already averaged their American results and found that only around 2% are more than 1% nigger. You can't argue with genetic facts. None of the farmers in the first post look in any way colored.



When? It's the opposite. Any mulattoes married into the colored population. It was not socially acceptable for it to be the other way around.

Dude, I’ve already explained how this gels with that I said. Many American whites do have distant admixture. To say otherwise is denial

[hangh]

It's impressive how you manage to be wrong in nearly every statement you make, but to make clear first of all, Mississippi is not just the Gulf Coast. The Delta is not the Gulf. The Hill Country is not the Gulf. You are not familiar with Mississippi and it shows. I doubt you've ever spent time there.

Nothing I said was remotely wrong + the one drop rule groups most of the visibly black population into one group, the black category. The populations obviously mixed for the black American population to be mixed. You’re being deliberately slow

[HectorOfTroy]

I wonder whether it's true that white Americans tend to have more harmonious/refined facial features. Also more pedomorphic tendencies. Cause I've lived here all of my life there seems to be a distinct set of white American looks I'm familiar with.

Perhaps this refinement of facial features is actually degeneration and dilution rather than progression?

Yeah I've noticed Europeans tend to have more exaggerated facial features than White Americans. i think it's because most white Americans are euro-mutts so all the exaggerated features get blended in and 'averaged' out into features that stand out less because the extreme ranges have been normalized due to being averaged.

[Smeagol]

Dude, I’ve already explained how this gels with that I said. Many American whites do have distant admixture. To say otherwise is denial

Yeah. Like 2%. You lied and claimed a majority.

[Smeagol]

Nothing I said was remotely wrong + the one drop rule groups most of the visibly black population into one group, the black category. The populations obviously mixed for the black American population to be mixed. You’re being deliberately slow

You're trying to get out of addressing the fact that you've never been to Mississippi and have very little knowledge of the state. I'll say it again: Mississippi is not just the Gulf Coast. The Delta is not the Gulf. The Hill Country is not the Gulf. You are not familiar with Mississippi and it shows.

[Melkiirs]

I'm guessing you're very young. Your generation doesn't seem to be able to handle words very well. Or anything else for that matter.

Are you a millennial vs generation Z?

[Kess]

It's because darkies always need something to complain about.

If you find the N-word offensive, why you call each other with N-word. I don't get it that mentality.

[CordedWhelp]

Yeah I've noticed Europeans tend to have more exaggerated facial features than White Americans. i think it's because most white Americans are euro-mutts so all the exaggerated features get blended in and 'averaged' out into features that stand out less because the extreme ranges have been normalized due to being averaged.

Case in point: myself. I’m sort of Pan-Euro whilst still somehow looking distinctly American. I have come to terms, haha..
124165

[earthling1]

Yeah I've noticed Europeans tend to have more exaggerated facial features than White Americans. i think it's because most white Americans are euro-mutts so all the exaggerated features get blended in and 'averaged' out into features that stand out less because the extreme ranges have been normalized due to being averaged.

This is pretty much what i've been trying to tell OP.

[hangh]

This is pretty much what i've been trying to tell OP.

His post says nothing about robusticity vs gracility. You keep making the claim that Americans, specifically, have more "rounded, less robust" features than Europeans, and that is immediately disproven with photographic evidence and common knowledge.

You keep on claiming that Americans have "less robust" features than Europeans, and then claimed that Americans were "more alpinized" on average than Europeans due to "Amerindian admixture", which is blatantly wrong and actually backwards, as I have explained, with facts and photographic evidence, that you've desperately tried to ignore. Respond to the posts I've left containing photographic evidence, and level with the points made in those, instead of rabidly ignoring everything that contradicts with your dumb Euro-supremacist nonsense.

They were discussing harmonious/symmetrical facial features, and the person you were responding to was speaking to the claim that Americans were more mixed and lacked the more distinct traits of specific European phenotypes on average. This doesn't support your claims that Americans are "less robust", which are thoroughly contradicted by all the photographic evidence presented here.

You made specific points that don't pass the smell test at all, pretending to know more about the types of faces you can find "outside of the northeast" in the USA, and have never owned up to this. You even claimed you "wouldn't find people who look like Trudeau" outside of the northeast in the US (implying that Canadians somehow have the more robust features, despite having more Alpinized French admixture, more Amerindian admixture, and less Germanic admixture), and I immediately gave you photographic evidence of a boy I went to school with who looked identical. I then explained the phenotypic nature of white Americans and the specific ethnic strains present in the rest of the country and the Midwest in particular, and you kept ignoring these posts to pretend that your imaginary perspective of American is accurate. "That guy with big cheeks in the last photo in your original post is a perfect example" - no, he's not. Everyone at that table has more robust, noticeably less alpinized features than Europeans on average.

[hangh]

Case in point: myself. I’m sort of Pan-Euro whilst still somehow looking distinctly American. I have come to terms, haha..
124165

You don't look "distinctly" American. I wouldn't be able to distinguish you as an American man, a Canadian man, a German, a Swede, a Brit...

[hangh]

Yeah. Like 2%. You lied and claimed a majority.

No, I never claimed a majority.

[hangh]

You're trying to get out of addressing the fact that you've never been to Mississippi and have very little knowledge of the state. I'll say it again: Mississippi is not just the Gulf Coast. The Delta is not the Gulf. The Hill Country is not the Gulf. You are not familiar with Mississippi and it shows.

Lol how does this contradict anything I've said? Your arguments are infantile.

[Smeagol]

Lol how does this contradict anything I've said? Your arguments are infantile.

Is it true or isn't it?

When arguing with someone like you, it's necessary to take it one claim at a time because otherwise you'll just keep going off topic and ignoring points you don't want to address.

[hangh]

That's what you do though? It's elementarily true, and it doesn't make anything I've said about the state incorrect.

"Illinois is predominantly German, but Polish, as well as Black ancestry are particularly common in the state, especially in the Chicago and Greater St. Louis areas".

Responding with something like "Illinois isn't just the Chicago and Greater St. Louis areas, it's also the downstate region. The downstate region is not Chicagoland. The capital region is not Chicagoland. You obviously know nothing about Illinois" doesn't invalidate the original sentence in any way. It's completely redundant.

You sound like an argumentative 12 year old