Ygorcs
Active member
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 812
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Multiracial Brazilian
Because it's not to others, especially people who dont have blue eyes ( wich i'am part of ) to call people with blue eyes out like they are shit. Racial bias and sexual bias are real things, wich i personnally dont care about, but a lot of people want to deconstruct those things. It's bad if you are a white guy having sexual bias over blonde blue eyed girl, but it's not if having over an african or a racial minority. It should be pretty obvious that fair features doesn't gives you any power, i dont understand your comment against racism here. So you cannot considering somebody special if he as blue eyes and blonde hair? its against every people that doesn't have those features? It's sad that such targeted shaming is happenning to Europe. And finally, what the heck have indo-european cultures to do with all this crap? Do you see warriors around you? Is Sweden a pride viking country? If you know actuality, then you know thats not. What IE was 4000 years ago, is not what it is today, this is for this reason i believe things like nationalism are bullshit, because those are federative ideas, you are willing to believe that everyone from your ethnic thinks the same, if it was the case, there would not be any other humans than europeans in europe.
Dude, you're a bit obsessed about this. It's no shaming and no attack (like they are shit, what?) to say that blue-eyed people may not have inherited these traits from Eastern European steppe peoples, and that Middle Eastern populations may have had some contribution in the spread of that traits. Unless, of course, you think that there is something especially superior about Eastern Europe or steppe Indo-Europeans, and simultaneously something really shameful and. No self-aware blue-eyed person would feel offended by the mere suggestion (even if it end up being totally wrong) that the high frequencies of blue eyes in their nations may be a relatively recent situation and that blue eyes may have already existed in high frequency in parts of the Middle East before it achieved high frequency in the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Most blue-eyed people won't even know what the Pontic-Caspian steppe is, to be honest.
No, I don't think there's anything "special" about someone having blue eyes or blonde hair - not brown hair, red hair. It may be interesting, beautiful, exotic, fascinating, rare in some regions, but why woud some human being be "special" or "better" because of that? That statement is not just naive, but it's also problematic if you don't choose to ignore the very ugly and dangerous history of racism and white supremacism (particularly of the kind obsessed with "North European looks" - blonde, blue-eyed, very pale) in the very recent past, just decades ago. Statements have a history and a context that either justifies it or makes it even worse. You can't ignore historic and social context. Black pride usually means, in practice, something very different in society than white/blue eyes pride, let alone an even stronger assertion which is people with blue eyes are "special".