@Prats

@Prats

 

The "Jordanian" guy from that duo actually has a South Indian low-caste mother. Perhaps you should do your research before posting.

 

I don't care much for ethnocentric world views. India isnt a major player on the global stage, and the way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if the status quo doesn't change going forward. I only care about Global perspectives. And in a truly globalized world, India is simply the Latin America of the East. South Asians are a mix of West and East Eurasian to different degrees, with the result that some, particularly a minuscule minority in the NW, are Caucasian, and all others are mixes to varying degrees, resulting in a Latin American population structure. 

 

And these terms are not American specific, anymore than the term "Caste system" is Portuguese specific; India's varna and jati system has a foreign name to begin with -- I don't see why we can't apply the respective racial classification terms within the purview of that foreign caste system to India's masses of people as well. BTW, these terms have a mathematical component to them -- Indios are between 10-50% West Eurasian/Caucasian, Mestizos between 50-60%, Harnizos between 60-70%, Castizos between 70-80% and Criollos between >80-98%. Its just shorthand to describe the proportion(s) of one's ancestral background. 

 

I find that these terms are far more malign than terms like “Brahmin" and "Vaishya" and "Chamar" and "Dom" that have a monstrous, negative perception to them not grounded in science. There are North Indians that literally think of South and East Indians as a different species, as opposed to being their blood brothers in sharing different proportions of ancestry. India really needs to shift its focus from varna and jati and caste to race, and educate its populace about the very real Aryan migration, and subsequent migrations and mixing that occurred, resulting in the present-day 1.4 billion strong population, consisting of islands of genetic units, more than 2000 ethnicities strong, most of whom haven't mixed for close to two millenia in many cases. 

 

And honestly, your "Brown" conception of the Mediterranean and West Asian World South and East of Italy is so intellectually dishonest and insane, that I won't even bother addressing it. I don't care how Brown John Stamos or some other Greek is, he is still Caucasian and a completely different race from East Eurasians. The same applies to people like Nikki Haley, who BTW is Brown in color. Skin color has little to do with race anyhow, otherwise all Far East Asians, including the Japanese, Koreans, and Chinese would be part of the White/Beige race along with Northern and Western Europeans. It is a laughable thought. Please dont discuss this idea with me again. 

 

Here in America, and in the rest of the Western Hemisphere, people judge someone's ethnicity and race by their appearance exclusive of skin color -- they look at anthropometric markers like bone structure, facial features, hair texture, physique, etc to determine one's origin/race. By that token, NW South Asians are Caucasians/West Asians. Also, people with origins in MENA countries are counted as "White" here in America. I've traveled extensively in Europe and in some MENA countries, and I can tell you without a doubt, they think of NW South Asian biradri folks as either MENA or Slavic people, depending on their appearance. Being "Indian" never crosses their mind, not even once, as expected. OTOTH, in both MENA countries and in Europe, most Indians would be considered either A) Latinos/Hispanics  B)Gypsies/Romani  C)SE Asians  or D) Dravidians/"Indians" (*only applies to people like Aziz Ansari and Mindy Kaling) when going by their appearance/racial phenotype. Shobha De would be considered either a non-White Hispanic/Latino or a Gypsy in Europe and in MENA countries. (A slim chance she might be considered Indian by people familiar with India's diversity, as they associate these mixed non-Caucasoid faces with India sometimes, but mostly "Indian" means a Dravidian appearance)

 

As far as my aunt goes, nothing about her is exclusive to America or Americans alone. The long list of traits you mentioned (tan skin, symmetrical features, good teeth, etc) are far from being characteristic of Americans alone, I've seen people in NW India with these characteristics, not to mention Europeans and MENA folks (Turkey, Lebanon, Georgia, etc). Perhaps to your Indian eye this screams "American" but from a Globalized perspective, these are all physical markers of good health, fertility and the end result of a lifetime of living in a high SES environment, all things found in other countries. 

My aunt is considered either Mediterranean or West Asian here in the States, not South Asian, as people here caricaturize South Asians as a Tamil/Malayali/Keralite/Telugu/Kannadiga race with Patels thrown in for good measure. Even people that look like non-White Latinos (which make up the bulk of Indians, since South India is a relative minority of India's population) are not considered "Indian" here. And I'm actually glad more people are realizing that "Indian" is nothing more than a nationality, and not a race, so it makes sense that Indians and South Asians are SO different from each other in appearance/phenotype/race. 

 

Look up the show "Family Karma" on Youtube, its about a group of Gujaratis and South Indians living in Miami, they all blend in as locals, because the Miami-Ft. Lauderdale area has a huge LatinAm population, with large numbers of non-White Hispanics and Latinos. When the show debuted this past summer, Americans were talking about how they all looked like non-White Latinos and not "Indian" and characters in the show have been mistaken as such by Americans all the time. "Indian" as a label to describe ethnicity and race is meaningless, just like "Brown" is -- it is an utterly useless and scientifically invalid term. I suggest you stop using it, for your sake.