0
Thumbs Up |
Received: 490 Given: 741 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2,500 Given: 2,436 |
yeah we see the differences but from the outside, pigmentation important than facial features imo. most turks have same pigmentation as balkan or southern euro people. that's why people think turks more like southern euros than menas.
i think we are most look like caucasus people. (both western and eastern turkey)
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2,315 Given: 1,210 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2,797 Given: 2,465 |
I agree with Mergen. Most of the Western Anatolian metropolitans are heavily mixed and the citycenters of those metropolitans are ethnically(don't confuse with nationality) at least 50% non-Turkish or mixed-with-Turkish. Even, if we exclude everyone except Anatolian Turks native to those cities.
Foe example; some sources say İzmir is at most 60%-70% Turk(40%-50% if we exclude Balkan Turks & Anatolian Turk immigrants from other provinces, I guess). If we go to countysides of Izmir, then the percentage of course will increase. But if we go to the center of the citycenter, then it may fall into 20%-30%.
If we don't count Balkan & other Anatolian immigrants, then İzmir can look more homogenous. Even less European if we exclude Balkan immigrants(even Balkan Turks). Yes, Western Turks mostly look more European(especially Med) than Turks from other regions but I don't think they can pass as Central European (maybe except some individuals)
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2,315 Given: 1,210 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 2,315 Given: 1,210 |
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks