Eurasian Beauties

galviggo said:
She's beautiful!
So who is she? Name? Is she a model or actress?
She reminds me of Simone Kerr from IMG.

If she really was Eurasian then she got a lucky mix. Most Eurasians I know end up looking less pretty than that. Most people have in mind Eurasian as looking something like that girl; well sadly in my experience it's not usually the case...

She has the long nose/wide mouth combo I like.:heart: ^_^
I've seen her before. She happens to look particularly good here, but I suspect if you saw more of her you wouldn't like her based on your taste.

Hmmm...I just noticed that she looks a bit like Olivia Hussey.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i really don't know what you mean...marqueemoon:rolleyes: she is beautiful...
1009.jpg

allfansites.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
galviggo said:
I knew, from prior experience at another messageboard, that bringing race and my personal take on it would probably generate some heat so I'll clarify once and then leave it be.

You are defining yourself using an old geographical term. I'm defining the group based on race (physical characteristics) although I realize that doesn't always work, either. My definition of "Asian" does not encompass any part of the middle east. When I say Asian I mean East Asian. I speak for most other East Asians I know who are confused when persons of, say, Indian or middle eastern descent classify themselves as "Asian." Why do you not consider the Lebanese part of yourself of the "middle east" (I also think it's unfortunate that there is no such "official category" here in the US) or did I get the term wrong? I'm asking honestly. I mean no disrespect.

I'm not about to get all anthropological because I don't have the necessary background, but I DO think the geographical term "Asia Minor" (on which I think you base your argument) needs to be redefined and split up into other segments. It covers too massive an amount of space and too many ethnic subgroups to be a homogenous entity such that the term would imply. The term "Asian" as I personally use it includes only East Asians. (But even within this group people fight about how much territory East Asian includes: I know some Chinese people who don't consider Indonesians, Burmese, Filipina (due to Spanish blood I wager) "East Asian." And I'm not sure what to do with Mongolia and Tibet, I think they're closely related to each other but not terribly similar to most East Asians.) Personally, I'm not even sure where the boundaries of "East Asian" lie. All this presupposes that one classifies race according to one specific set of criteria: physical features/race, or geographical location, etc. and not a mix.

Indians, Kashmiri, Pakistani, etc. are classified as Caucasian from both a racial and an anthropological point of view. And why shouldn't they be? From a physical standpoint they are Caucasian. They have Caucasian features with dark, dusky coloring. They have Caucasian builds: tall, longer-limbed. They look nothing like East Asians with flatter faces and shorter stature. If you include parts of the middle east then drew a line of demarcation up, then practically half of Russia and all of the "stan"-countries end up Asian, too. Yet they share no physical traits with East Asians, neither in face nor form. Not even in coloring, one of those less important characteristics!: East Asians never have light-colored eyes (that I know of) while many folks in the middle east do. (In parts of Asia, I am addressed in formal English probably because my hair and eyes are a little different in shade, yet I speak the language fluently. That is how narrow some people's idea of Asian is.) Linguistically, they are vastly dissimilar. They have completely different cultures as well. I see no reason they should be put in the same category. They have nothing in common (save that we're all human of course :D).

This article basically sums up my take on how misleading the term "Asian" is:
http://www.isteve.com/2002_Who_Exactly_Is_an_Asian_American.htm
I agree with what he's saying in general.

Or maybe I could become more consistent in referring to the better portion of my background as "East Asian" rather than just "Asian." Right now, I use both terms and I use them interchangeably. I never use the term "Oriental" because I hate it. I always think of a rug or a vase or something not human.

[Or: Perhaps the notion of race has become outdated because I am seeing more and more second and third-generation Asians (East Asians) call themselves "American" drawing no distinction between nationality and race. I don't know whether this is a phenomenon particular to certain groups of East Asians, usually in big cities and able to trace Americanized backgrounds back to the 1800s when the first wave of Chinese and then Japanese immigrated here. They tell me recognizing race is old and oudated; prevents assimilation and perpetuates racism, etc. I do understand their reasons, even though I find it a little sad. I guess it's the same for them: A lot of them have never been to Asia, can't speak the language, don't understand let alone practice the culture, been raised in a completely American way of life, married other Americans, etc. etc. but to be honest I cannot view the world without race and I don't know how they do it either. I don't view that was as a positive or negative thing; it just is.]

Yea I agree. Realisitically anyone oritental looking is considered asian in north american and european populations. Anyone with straight black hair, yellow skin, their sterotypical slanty eyes, low nose bridge, etc are oriental hense asian.

Some people add the extra term oriental asian when describing chinese koreans and japanese for example, to clarify oriental isntead of asians which can include indians whom they dont consider to be oriental looking.

Historically speaking, japanese koreans and chinese etc have close bonds where their culture crosses a lot more than compared to neven neighboring cultures. You can tell by their language even used today and their literature. Their art forms are similar also and as do their religious beleifs are also similar.

Their looks are different. I personally think indian people are more caucasian looking than asians do and I do believe anthropologically they are considered caucasians to a degree (the indians and the persians etc).

It is also important to note that regardless of the science of it all (anthropology), the mainstream population consider caucasian features to be that of similarity to the greeks. Basically in our media influenced minds (or whatever else the raesons), the most caucasian person is one that mostly resembles greeks (as in ancient greece, like the statues) in facial features and body type. Even amonghst caucasians we can tell who is 'more' caucasian looking and who is 'less' caucasian looking. For example Kiristen Dunst looks less caucasian than sandra bullock, agree? Why do we think that anyways. I think realisitcally they are both 'just as caucasian'. But because sandra bullock has more 'caucasian' features and dunst has a flatter sounder face, she is less caucasian.

It is also important to note that we only see 3 spectrums. The caucasians, the african blacks and oriental asians. With african blackss out of the equation, people generally consider asians to be the opposite in looks to caucasians. What is not a caucasian feature is an asian feature and what is asian is not caucasian. Hense when asians have big eyes or double eyelids or high nose bridge they are 'caucasian features'.

Thats how it is though and racism/racial disparity generally occurs as a result of looks and how we differ from each other physically.
 
nanker_phledge said:
Source for Tina Baltzer's pictures : http://www.supermodels.nl/tinabaltzer

For Bambou's pictures : www.gainsbourg.net and http://perso.wanadoo.fr/mix.wave/gainsbourg/galerie/Bamboupoup/poupees.htm

For Kristin Kreuk's picture :http://blog.doctissimo.fr/php/blog/au_pays_des_filles/images/kristin%20kreuk.jpg

For Mylène Jampanoi's pictures : www.mylenejampanoi.com

For Julie Dreyfus' picture :www.iansmith.co.uk

For Nerry Lynch's pictures : www.hintmag.com
Thank you for the links and credits

_teddy_, i've always thought that Kirsten Dunst would be considered to be more caucasian than Sandra Bullock, simply because of the whole "blue blooded" pilgram idea back from the times the settlers came to America. Theyre idea of blue blood, which was the highest form of the "white" race was blue eyed and blonde hair. That was also the ideal Hitler was going for even though he had brown hair :huh:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yourbestfriend said:
Thank you for the links and credits

_teddy_, i've always thought that Kirsten Dunst would be considered to be more caucasian than Sandra Bullock, simply because of the whole "blue blooded" pilgram idea back from the times the settlers came to America. Theyre idea of blue blood, which was the highest form of the "white" race was blue eyed and blonde hair. That was also the ideal Hitler was going for even though he had brown hair :huh:
But if you look at just the face then she doesnt look as caucasian. Maybe sandra bullock is a bad example. Lets compare say charliez theron and her, id say theron is more caucasian looking in this case also. Its just something about dunst that doesnt scream 'full caucasian' even though she is with her green eyes and red hair aside. Or maybe even kiristen dunst is a bad example but you know what I mean. You sometimes see caucasian people you dont think look too caucasian. Or a more caucasian looking friend than another caucasian,e tc. But why!? Anyways modern anthropology says race is not a true term anyways to follow in with political correctness.

Oh an interesting thing i noticed is, a lot of hispanic people (spanish) look very eurasian (hapa or whatever)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't forget the sources fashionkitten. and i think it would be better to post these pics in renatas's thread...:flower:
 
I repeat 'oriental' refers to Arabs and Jews from the Middle-East as well even ethnically speaking. Now I'm going to only state myself as an 'Arab' because Asia is apparently the 'privilege' of South-East Asians.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
_teddy_ said:
But if you look at just the face then she doesnt look as caucasian. Maybe sandra bullock is a bad example. Lets compare say charliez theron and her, id say theron is more caucasian looking in this case also. Its just something about dunst that doesnt scream 'full caucasian' even though she is. Anyways modern anthropology says race is not a true term anyways to follow in with political correctness.

Oh an interesting thing i noticed is, a lot of hispanic people (spanish) look very eurasian (hapa or whatever)

I don't use the term "hapa" but I know others who do in more colloquial sense (I don't mind it though, at least not in the same way I mind the term "Oriental").

Dunst looks very typically German to me, to be frank.

Agree with your Hispanic/Eurasian looks comment except I'd reverse it: a lot of Eurasians end up looking vaguely Hispanic (NOT Spanish, a term which refers to the European Spaniards who are very Caucasian-looking with, usually, dark coloring. Ex: Penelope Cruz, Paz Vega, Eugenia Silva). Yes, that's true imo, I've noticed this "pattern" and I've noticed it since I was a kid. In fact I'd say this vaguely Hispanic look describes about 50% of the Eurasians I've known. About 35% look predominantly East Asian with little Caucasian highlights around the eyes (lidded), skin (fair), and nose (not flat/higher bridge/sometimes retrousse), sometimes in face shape (narrower). I'd say I fall into that 35%. In parts of Asia, that is enough to get you addressed in formal English and treated as an outsider even if you speak the language fluently. And the remaining 15% have a Caucasian base with Asiatic highlights; that is to say, my favorite type when "mixed right". :heart: Lucky people...^_^ And then there are a few outliers who look really strange: ie neither Caucasian nor east Asian really...very hard to explain. I was trying to describe to my mom what this Chinese-Caucasian boy at school looks like and was at a peculiar loss for words.

Btw, none of those #s are scientific! It's just something I noticed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
galviggo said:
I don't use the term "hapa" but I know others who do in more colloquial sense (I don't mind it though, at least not in the same way I mind the term "Oriental").

Dunst looks very typically German to me, to be frank.

Agree with your Hispanic/Eurasian looks comment except I'd reverse it: a lot of Eurasians end up looking vaguely Hispanic (NOT Spanish, a term which refers to the European Spaniards who are very Caucasian-looking with, usually, dark coloring. Ex: Penelope Cruz, Paz Vega, Eugenia Silva). Yes, that's true imo, I've noticed this "pattern" and I've noticed it since I was a kid. In fact I'd say this vaguely Hispanic look describes about 50% of the Eurasians I've known. About 35% look predominantly East Asian with little Caucasian highlights around the eyes (lidded), skin (fair), and nose (not flat/higher bridge/sometimes retrousse), sometimes in face shape (narrower). I'd say I fall into that 35%. In parts of Asia, that is enough to get you addressed in formal English and treated as an outsider even if you speak the language fluently. And the remaining 15% have a Caucasian base with Asiatic highlights; that is to say, my favorite type when "mixed right". :heart: Lucky people...^_^ And then there are a few outliers who look really strange: ie neither Caucasian nor east Asian really...very hard to explain. I was trying to describe to my mom what this Chinese-Caucasian boy at school looks like and was at a peculiar loss for words.

Btw, none of those #s are scientific! It's just something I noticed.

That's probably because Hispanics are mostly Native American in ethnic make up. There are a few countries in Latin Ameria like Argentina and Brazil where most of the Whites are purely European ethnically, but I don't consider White Brazilians and Argentinians Hispanic.
 
You know I heard that, I believe it was denmark, that their princes (they have 2 sons in the royal family) that the one who married the chinese girl wasnt allowed to be the king even though he was older (and usualy is the one who takes throne after they pass the crown) because then it would be the first time that an asian person would be queen of denmark, whereas the other son was single all the time. Untill one day that son meets an australian girl in australia and then they got together. Now, the younger son is going to take throne because he married the australian girl, who obviously would look and be caucasian.

The point of what is sick about it is, they didnt even care if the person is danish, what matters is that its caucasian (not asian), to be in the throne. I can see their point if they disregarded the asian because she wasnt danish, but they disregarded the asian because she was asian and not caucasian.
 
Wow what an interesting and sad story. Thanks teddy. I will ask my Danish friends about this story.
 
_teddy_ said:
You know I heard that, I believe it was denmark, that their princes (they have 2 sons in the royal family) that the one who married the chinese girl wasnt allowed to be the king even though he was older (and usualy is the one who takes throne after they pass the crown) because then it would be the first time that an asian person would be queen of denmark, whereas the other son was single all the time. Untill one day that son meets an australian girl in australia and then they got together. Now, the younger son is going to take throne because he married the australian girl, who obviously would look and be caucasian.

The point of what is sick about it is, they didnt even care if the person is danish, what matters is that its caucasian (not asian), to be in the throne. I can see their point if they disregarded the asian because she wasnt danish, but they disregarded the asian because she was asian and not caucasian.

Was it Alexandra Manley of Denmark?
http://www.princessalexandradk.net/
I saw her on the news when she got divorced recently (a few months ago?) but I'm not familiar with her story. I think she's 1/4 Chinese.

So I'm scrolling through some of her pictures and although she's obviously past her prime in these she's very attractive...except for the fatigued eyes but I think that's due to age. In some fresher younger photos she stronly resembles Julie Dreyfus (who is not Eurasian).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
marqueemoon said:
I've seen her before. She happens to look particularly good here, but I suspect if you saw more of her you wouldn't like her based on your taste.

Hmmm...I just noticed that she looks a bit like Olivia Hussey.

Yes, yes she does! In that beautiful picture especially. I've never seen her before and I don't recall her being a part of the Brasilian wave.

I looked at the other pictures morbidexistence posted and she's soft and pretty in them, but not as beautful as in that headshot. I don't like her mouth (I like the longness of it, but her lips look completely boxed. In every picture. I thought she was just pouting in that first headshot). Also, there's a vague alien quality to her face around the eyes and top of the nose bridge, which is both charming and odd. I think it has to do with the spacing of her eyes, very far apart, and the shape, long and narrow, framing a low nose bridge. Do you see it?

She's more attractive to me than any other Brasilian model I can think of right now, for sure. I wonder what her exact ethnic makeup is.
 
_teddy_ said:
You know I heard that, I believe it was denmark, that their princes (they have 2 sons in the royal family) that the one who married the chinese girl wasnt allowed to be the king even though he was older (and usualy is the one who takes throne after they pass the crown) because then it would be the first time that an asian person would be queen of denmark, whereas the other son was single all the time. Untill one day that son meets an australian girl in australia and then they got together. Now, the younger son is going to take throne because he married the australian girl, who obviously would look and be caucasian.

The point of what is sick about it is, they didnt even care if the person is danish, what matters is that its caucasian (not asian), to be in the throne. I can see their point if they disregarded the asian because she wasnt danish, but they disregarded the asian because she was asian and not caucasian.

If you had bothered to check then you could have noticed that Alexandra Manley married Joachim who is younger than Frederick and has never been the Crown Prince. You are just trying to label someone racist. This is rude.
 
It's ridiculous, of course the term Asian isn't exclusive to Chinese and Japanese. And sure maybe in America 'Asian' means Chinese and Japanese but in Britain 'Asian' refers EXACTLY to Afghanis, Indo-Pakistanis, etc. The Middle East is geographically in Southwest Asia, so of course Lebanese/Arabs are Asians.

And frankly I find the term Caucasian ludicrous and I would hope anyone who knows the etymology of the word would too. The only true Caucasians are those from the Caucasus (Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Georgians), which is incidentally the geographically accepted definition of Eurasia.

Galviggo I don't see why it would be baffling as to why a person would define themself by their continental origin. Having a high-bridged nose or tall build does not equate to being 'Caucasian'. I hope you don't believe that as no physical traits are exclusive to any ethnic group.
 
violet said:
It's ridiculous, of course the term Asian isn't exclusive to Chinese and Japanese. And sure maybe in America 'Asian' means Chinese and Japanese but in Britain 'Asian' refers EXACTLY to Afghanis, Indo-Pakistanis, etc. The Middle East is geographically in Southwest Asia, so of course Lebanese/Arabs are Asians.

And frankly I find the term Caucasian ludicrous and I would hope anyone who knows the etymology of the word would too. The only true Caucasians are those from the Caucasus (Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Georgians), which is incidentally the geographically accepted definition of Eurasia.

Galviggo I don't see why it would be baffling as to why a person would define themself by their continental origin. Having a high-bridged nose or tall build does not equate to being 'Caucasian'. I hope you don't believe that as no physical traits are exclusive to any ethnic group.

Do you believe it is wrong to describe somebody as black or white?
 
violet said:
It's ridiculous, of course the term Asian isn't exclusive to Chinese and Japanese. And sure maybe in America 'Asian' means Chinese and Japanese but in Britain 'Asian' refers EXACTLY to Afghanis, Indo-Pakistanis, etc. The Middle East is geographically in Southwest Asia, so of course Lebanese/Arabs are Asians.

And frankly I find the term Caucasian ludicrous and I would hope anyone who knows the etymology of the word would too. The only true Caucasians are those from the Caucasus (Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Georgians), which is incidentally the geographically accepted definition of Eurasia.

Galviggo I don't see why it would be baffling as to why a person would define themself by their continental origin. Having a high-bridged nose or tall build does not equate to being 'Caucasian'. I hope you don't believe that as no physical traits are exclusive to any ethnic group.

Must be differences in upbringing. I've heard that in the UK one refers to Pakistani, Indian,... as Asian, but I'm American, raised here in the US, and believe me when an American says "Asian" he typically means "East Asian." If they mean to refer to an "Indian" they will say Indian, and if they mean "middle eastern" they will say exactly that. Most Americans I know define Asian according to race which is all I'm trying to say.

Now some people don't like neither the geographical nor the racial definition. If you called my American by nationality ex (who is of Alexandrian and Asiatic Turk descent) "Asian," since "by geography" he "technically" is "Asian," he would be most offended and take the opportunity to correct you. My definition is no more right or wrong than yours; rather you choose a geographical basis for your definition whereas I prefer racial. On his application forms he checked "other" as it did not include "middle eastern" and he was eventually categorized as Caucasian (since racially that is precisely what he is, but try telling that to him).

I never said certain physical traits were exclusive to Caucasians (or to Asians); at most I hinted that these traits were more likely/much more often found in Caucasians (and other traits in Asians). I made wide, sweeping generalizations as are necessary to avoid going into the minutest of details about my varied background. I hate it when people assume "oh, so squinty eyes automatically means you're Asian? So no Caucasians have squinty eyes? What, Asians can't be tall?" It really annoys the piss out of me! Unless that person is really, truly going to say that they don't notice physical differences between Asian and Caucasian, which I just don't buy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kassfadei said:
If you had bothered to check then you could have noticed that Alexandra Manley married Joachim who is younger than Frederick and has never been the Crown Prince. You are just trying to label someone racist. This is rude.
um.. well... somebody told me that story.. and geez chill out lol
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,470
Messages
15,186,193
Members
86,346
Latest member
zemi
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->