evolution of DNA
Yeah, I know, it's racist. That's why it's here. I just hope it's not considered insulting, and gets a pass for being interesting. I was thinking about the Asian type face. Epicanthic folds, round cheeks, small features. It's very similar to babies, very cute. We see the full cheeks in all the races, they appeal, I presume, to people who like babies. People who love babies. They're geared to respond to that feature set.
So, why would a whole chunk of the planet fill with that dominant feature? Why not the whole planet? I thought about how humans migrated from Africa, and that meant across the Himalayans, the high cold deserts, all those terrible places. To get through those terrible places, a population would take a very long time, and only those who took the best care of their children would make it into the future. Because harsh conditions test children so very much. So they are people who love children. No, I am not talking about perversion, I'm talking about parental devotion. Remember, many crowded parts of the planet included a lot of infanticide. That is not how people behave who love children. Interestingly enough, those areas have a lot more lean faced types.
So anyway, because of the subject matter, I can't discuss it with anyone. Racism is too hot a topic and whether you're insulting or not, someone is going to drag out the soapbox to dress you down for addressing the subject at all. But I liked thinking it through. I wanted to remember the idea.
No of course it doesn't apply on the individual level. Everyone is potentially the exception to everything, and time's passage changes whole populations now as much as it ever did then. This isn't meant as a judgement on people of today because the face type is way older than anything we regard as communities today. I think they would have emerged from the harsh evolution through the high mountains and deserts with those changes indelibly attached and all people who migrated in the early years of the stone age would have migrated generationally at that time, changing with the journey. I do not think it was until we harnessed animals that we began to shrink the distances to making such journeys within single lifetimes. And of course, returning means established communities to support your journey, vs being a nomad in the wilderness with no reason to think there's a place on the other end. It's always been empty, right? (unless you get to coasts with sea people?)
Oh and that thing about mental proclivities of various peoples? Probably related to the language they learned, not some magical difference in our humanities. Our languages begin in our lifestyles but then they influence our mentation in return, helping us become more rooted in the culture of our times. So if some skillset has always been unneeded in our communities, it won't be in our native language either, so we won't be very good at it. Doesn't mean we can't learn. Still, if you swapped babies, I think the language would influence them more than the parentage.