Turks are White

[danceswithpoodles]

wiki has this
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_peoples

[king]

Jan 25, 2010 17:05:28 GMT -5 thracian08 said:

Novi, you have no proof that the original Turks were Mongoloid looking. And those Mummies found had Turkic clothing not European.

Nilo, Sure of course their are light Arabs on occasion. I'm talking about the average person.

"So you're saying the average Turk is green-eyed and blonde?"

What does your question have to do with what I said? I was talking about skin color. And I disagree, Kurds are darker skinned than Turks. Of course there are exceptions, I am talking about the average.

And I know of a lot Turks that have colored eyes, and blonde or light hair just as well.

I agree Greeks have different facial features than Turks, that's why the theories that Turks mixed with Greeks doesn't totally make sense, or that Greeks being pure Greeks also cannot be true as well My personal belief is that the indegenous population of Turkey do not look look Greeks from Greece.

why do you want to proof that turks are white? i think its because you are white and you want to proof your turkishness, right? im not against you you seem like a nice girls, im just curious

[hellboy87]

thracian and dy,why are you guys saying that darkness of people in Turkey is the result of intermarriage with Kurds or Arabs?

Lets go back to the beginning.

The Anatolians,of which most people in Turkey are descended of.Most of them have a Middle Eastern appearance,and the remaining ones look Mediterranean.Those brows and those Roman and hooked noses,are their striking features.

Some have typical European pale skin,some have European Mediterranean pale skin(which has a tint of colour to it which is why they can tan easier than northern Europeans),and then there are those with the yellowish skin or very olive skin.

Now,these skin colours and facial features,are found among the Arabs,ethnic Turks,Kurds,Azeris,Armenians,Assyrians,Egyptians and Berbers.

And you know what? They are also found among the Portuguese,Spaniards,Italians and Greeks.Yep! I have seen pictures and footages of people from these four ethnic groups who look pretty much Middle Eastern with no pale-ishness to their skin tone.But they are a minority of course(that skin colour and mostly Middle Eastern facial structure).

And yes,I have seen pictures and footage of Kurds and Arabs who have brownish skin.But their colour is not like mine.I have brown skin.They could be sun burned ones.

I have seen pictures of Kurds,Turks,Persians and Arabs who have Middle Eastern facial bone structure but with white skin(in picture,film footage and in the flesh).I have also seen those who have the very yellow or very olive skin colour.

The first time I met Turks for dinner,I sat with the men,4 of them.One,who was the darkest,very tan,was half-Kurdish.He told me his mom is Kurdish.

[thracian08]

No King, my belief is that Turks are white. Oguz Turks are the most whitest among Turkish people. And just b/c Turks are darker than Northern Europeans doesn't make them not White. Even Arabs are considered as White.


Because Turks are not dark skinned, that's why. Arabs, Kurds, Iranians, Afgans are all much darker than Turks. Sure there are exceptions, I never said there are not any lighter people among them. I am talking in general - the average.

And you are very incorrect about turks - Turks do not have hooked noses.

Hooked noses are preminent among Jews, Arabs, & Iranians. Kurds and Iranians have a unibrow- Turks do not.

They are also much hairier than Turks. It's the Turks Asian genes that make us less hairy

[hellboy87]

Turkic people,original ones,are northeast Asians racially.They look like the Chinese,Japanese,Mongolians and Koreans.

The largest movements,settlements of Turkics were in mainland Central Asia.There,they intermarried with the Indo-Iranian populations.Thats where the Turkics acquired Indo Iranian and Persian culture in their culture.

The ones that moved into Eastern European and the Middle East were smaller in comparison.There wasnt a mass settlement of Turkics in the Transcaucasia and Anatolia,Iraq,Syria.Which is why,Turkics there look indigenous to the region.Mostly assimilated locals.

There is no way,the Oghuz Turks were,just white.If they were just white,then they couldnt be Turkics.

Hooked noses,are a Middle Eastern thing,very very common in North Africa,West Asia,Anatolia,Iran.

Those bushy brows,unibrows,hooked noses,very common among ANATOLIAN Turks.And Anatolian Turks are hairy too.

I mean,have you seen DY's bush?

As for skin colour,the Arabs of the Peninsular are darker than the ones in the north and in Africa.But no big deal really.

[thracian08]

Let's clear up a few misconceptions.

Turks arn't Mongols, the early Turks lived in a region including Western Mongolia, Altai-Sayan region (todays Russia, Kazakistan) and the northern parts of Eastern Turkistan.

The present day Mongols were not living in that region during that period.

The early Turks inhabitted a region of the world in which to the East of them populations are more Mongoloid and to the West more Caucosoid (even though these terms are pretty archaic today). Chinese sources differentiate Turks from themselves and observed that the "looked different".

Thus the Turks being inbetween have characteristics from both, if you actually went to Turkic Central Asia historic Turkistan you would realise that Turks there are different looking Turks.
There are peoples in Northern Afganistan, Oz'bekistan, Turkmenistan who look similar to Turks in Azerbaijan or Turkey, then there are some Turks in Kazakistan and Kirgizistan who you will find don't look similar.

Its not a simple black and white issue.

Also, Turks moved westward b/c of climate change - the weather made Central Asia into a dessert. It wasn't like that before.

Hooked nose is a Jewish Arabic thing, not Turkish. unibrow is a Kurdish Iranian thing, not Turkish.

Turks are not hairy; please go see an Armenian Kurd or Iranian and then talk about hair!

Oh, no big deal really?? I didn't say anything about being a big deal,what I said are Arabs, Kurds and Iranians are darker skinned than Turks.

Yeah, and like Iranians are pure people themselves? I don't think so. They're mixed as well.

[todhrimencuri]

Turks are not white since the majority do not fit the classification of this. A small small percentage of Turks with strong Euro traits from northern Europe may pass for "white" around the US, but the vast majority do not. Even those who are "white" are too "ethnic" looking to really pass as the typical white person of the US.

I dont see why you need to fit in with such a disgusting classification created by western Europeans of the 19th century. In NYC, I was called "white boy" around my school by the more Hispanic and Black people. However, I have never defined with the dominant white population. I know full well my origins dont really allow for that.

[king]

Jan 26, 2010 13:17:49 GMT -5 thracian08 said:

No King, my belief is that Turks are white. Oguz Turks are the most whitest among Turkish people. And just b/c Turks are darker than Northern Europeans doesn't make them not White. Even Arabs are considered as White.

Arabs are only considered white in the US Census and the US census ist not really a indicator of your actuall race, in the society they are not considered white and they dont consider themselfes as white. on average turks are whiter than arabs. im curious what a dark turk would say if turks are white or not, the turks who say "turks are white" are usually white turks

[hellboy87]

Jan 26, 2010 20:19:23 GMT -5 @todhrimencuri said:

Turks are not white since the majority do not fit the classification of this. A small small percentage of Turks with strong Euro traits from northern Europe may pass for "white" around the US, but the vast majority do not. Even those who are "white" are too "ethnic" looking to really pass as the typical white person of the US.

I dont see why you need to fit in with such a disgusting classification created by western Europeans of the 19th century. In NYC, I was called "white boy" around my school by the more Hispanic and Black people. However, I have never defined with the dominant white population. I know full well my origins dont really allow for that.

This is probably due to the fact that most European Americans are German,English and Irish,who look alike.Other large groups include the Scottish,French,the Dutch and the Poles,who pretty much look alike although the French have quite a number Mediterranean looking ones.Whiteness in America was first based on these peoples.They are often referred to as WASP,although not all are ASP's obviously.They are the "Aryan" ones,so to speak.

Then,the first biggest "ethnic" looking European group to move in were the Italians(over 15 million today).America didnt exactly favour the less developed and "exotic" Europeans from the south,southeast and east of Europe.In fact,some even argued they are not white.Same went for the Irish too,propoganda materials even depicted the Irish as more animal like of their facial features.But we all know the Irish look the same as the biggest "Aryan" European groups in America.

Well,the first biggest group of "ethnic" looking Europeans to America is the Spaniards.Yes,the Spaniards.It's just that most of them are mixed with the indigenous people of the Americas.Hence,are considered different,another group,which for the Mestizo,Mulatto and Trio ones is true to an extent.They number in the millions in America today.

So yes,the typical "white" person of Turkey are regarded as too ethnic to pass as the typical white person in the US since most white Americans are the ones that I spoke about in my first paragraph above^

[hellboy87]

Jan 26, 2010 20:02:45 GMT -5 thracian08 said:

Let's clear up a few misconceptions.

Turks arn't Mongols, the early Turks lived in a region including Western Mongolia, Altai-Sayan region (todays Russia, Kazakistan) and the northern parts of Eastern Turkistan.

The present day Mongols were not living in that region during that period.

The early Turks inhabitted a region of the world in which to the East of them populations are more Mongoloid and to the West more Caucosoid (even though these terms are pretty archaic today). Chinese sources differentiate Turks from themselves and observed that the "looked different".

Thus the Turks being inbetween have characteristics from both, if you actually went to Turkic Central Asia historic Turkistan you would realise that Turks there are different looking Turks.
There are peoples in Northern Afganistan, Oz'bekistan, Turkmenistan who look similar to Turks in Azerbaijan or Turkey, then there are some Turks in Kazakistan and Kirgizistan who you will find don't look similar.

Its not a simple black and white issue.

Also, Turks moved westward b/c of climate change - the weather made Central Asia into a dessert. It wasn't like that before.

Hooked nose is a Jewish Arabic thing, not Turkish. unibrow is a Kurdish Iranian thing, not Turkish.

Turks are not hairy; please go see an Armenian Kurd or Iranian and then talk about hair!

Oh, no big deal really?? I didn't say anything about being a big deal,what I said are Arabs, Kurds and Iranians are darker skinned than Turks.

Yeah, and like Iranians are pure people themselves? I don't think so. They're mixed as well.

I never said Turkics were Mongols.I meant they are of the same stock as Mongols.And the Turkics and Mongols came from the same region.The Turkics were yellow skinned,flat faced and slanted eyed and black haired,just like the Mongols.

The Turkics in Central Asia today,many of them look mixed.For example,the Uzbeks and Turkmens of Turkmenistan,many look "Turanian".While for the Kazakhs and Kyrgyz,most look Northeast Asian.

Central Asia was already inhabited by people when they moved there.The Turkics simply mixed with them on all aspect.

As for the hook nosed and hairy body thing,please! IT IS A MIDDLE EASTERN and North African thing,ok? Like I've said,those features are very common among Anatolian Turks,Kurds,Assyrians,Iraqi & Syrian Turkmens,Azeris,Armenians,Persians,Arabs,Egyptians and Moroccans,ok? While doing research on Turks,I even saw a porn site in the listings called "Hairy Turks".No kidding!

[thracian08]

They can come from the same region just as Hungarians Finns and Bulgars, but they have prodominently white features. You are completely wrong on the hooked nose thing. My friend who lived in Turkey even said Turks have small noses, (she is Afgan herself) and said Afgans and Iranians have huge noses. It's the Asian gene.

The only people in Turkey that have hooked noses are the Laz - people who are related to Georgians.

Please go see an Armenian Iranian or Kurd and then talk about being hairy.

Yeah maybe for gays! Your comment doesn't prove anything.

Yeah but being white doesn't mean you have to look American British or Scandinavian. I think you u guys misunderstand what I mean by White.

White can mean Afgan, Iranian, Arabic, and any country from the Mediterreanean.

Ask any Turk and they will say they are White.

[hellboy87]

White is German,Swedish,Russian,Greek,Spanish,Hungarian,Belarussian among them.European ones.

Arabs,Kurds,Moroccans,Persian are generally not regarded as white.

CAUCASOID includes Europeans,North Africans,West Asian and maybe Indian subcontinental people.

By the way,Hungarians and Finns DO NOT come from the same place.And they are NOT Turkics.

And of course any Turk will say they are white:they want to be white! Thats what kemalism is about! Thats probably why your goverment,obsssively invited every Balkan Muslim to settle in Turkey.

Plus,I have seen profiles of Turkish people,many have listed MIDDLE EASTERN in the race category.

[thracian08]

are you joking? Yes, Turks, Hungarians and Finns do come from the same place.

They were a central asian tribe.The Huns were a Turkic confederation of Central Asian equestrian nomads or semi-nomads. Some of these Eurasian tribes moved into Europe in the 4th century, the most famous leader being Attila.

[king]

thracian is white but not all turks are white. @thracian, is blonde your natural hair colour?

[thracian08]

No you are wrong - Kemalism is about being Turkish, not white.

We invited Balkans Muslims and Balkan Turks because they were kicked out from their countries! A lot of migrations were even before the Republic of Turkey so get real!

[thracian08]

thracian is white but not all turks are white. @thracian, is blonde your natural hair colour?

If by white you mean European, than no, not all Turks are white. But if you mean Caucusaid, Turks are Causosoid.

Yes.

[king]

Jan 27, 2010 15:25:13 GMT -5 thracian08 said:

thracian is white but not all turks are white. @thracian, is blonde your natural hair colour?

If by white you mean European, than no, not all Turks are white. But if you mean Caucusaid, Turks are Causosoid.

Yes.

Yes. Turks are caucasoid.

[hellboy87]

Caucasoid is not white thracian.Only the Caucasoids from Europe.

Btw,Balkan Muslims,were not kicked out of the Balkans,at least not most.Mostly Circassians and Tatars were.

Also,even after the establishment of Turkey,they came up with propoganda to try and get Balkan Muslims to Turkey.

And Kemalism is about being white.Kemalism says Turkics are Aryans.They are not.You obviously havent seen my old thread.

Btw,Turkics come from Northeast of Asia,not mainland Central Asia.

[terroreign]

This man resembles Milo Djukanovic (president of Montenegro)

[hellboy87]

Yes,but he looks more Middle Eastern