“Lighter eyes let in more light, and are more sensitive to sunlight.”
This blog entry from the Gene Expression website talks about this and theorizes that this different amount of light changes the actual personality of blue-eyed people.
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/11/blue-eyed-ice-queens-and-brown-eyed.php
It also claims more men are blue-eyed and more women are green eyed. Also, the less emotional and more analytical blue-eyed men are more often found in professions that correspond with those traits such as engineers. There’s an exception for East Asians with a plausible reason given. It’s a very interesting theory (and I’d never heard of anything like it before) but more recent studies need to be done.
Wow, that’s interesting. Blue eyes only showed up among the Europeans—Russians included (and as they colonized places, subsequently in Americans, Canadians, and Australians/NZ) I guess because the sun was less intense there than in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. But I had no idea the eye color had an affect on behavior. Cool stuff.
There's the promotion of genetics as the primary influencer of personality. The use of the term 'race-baiting' as an attempt to brush aside criticism that conclusions are not only racist, but not based solidly on facts. And then there's the particularly revealing quote: "If they would have been black [they] probably would have gotten flak", which the author chose to bold. Add on the traditional tendency of 'startling' *evidence* that 'whites' are more intelligent, compassionate/friendly, beautiful than all the other races (with the exception that some suggest East Asians are more intelligent than 'whites,' but also more cowardly and less friendly/compassionate). Just how full of themselves can some people be?
The people who make such arguments are probably: ugly; moderate intelligence; and--obviously--are lacking in the kindness department.
You can find a 'white' who is more intelligent than a 'black.' You can find a 'black' who is more intelligent than a 'white.'
You can find a 'brown' who is more compassionate than a 'yellow.' You can find a 'yellow' who is more compassionate than a 'brown.'
As for beauty, will state that there's a toss-up. As some here suggest, colorful traits such as blue eyes, blondism (includes red-hair) do give 'whites' a leg up. However, in terms of structure, as a percentage, the most beautiful people seem to be in an area surrounding Mesopotamia. That is, if you were to pick the most beautiful genetic nation, that nation would be around Mesopotamia. However, if you were to pick the top 100 most beautiful people in the world, Europeans would be overwhelmingly represented. And yet, beauty is finicky, and not for PC reasons. Only a few generations ago, extremely pale-skinned men were considered more attractive than more tanned ones--that has since changed. A few generations before, an attractive woman would be what is now considered fat. During the Middle Ages, a high, broad forehead was attractive. That has become less of a decisive trait. And that's just taking a glimpse at Western standards of beauty. That standard has so dominated the global view on beauty that finding out what the local standards were before the Age of Colonialism. In contrast to the egotism of some 'white' racists, 'whites' might not have been universally considered beautiful upon first contact. If some surviving text about non-Europeans' views on European appearance is discovered, that could be revealing, either way.
In any case, prideful people--especially those who have no reason to be proud--are akin to a full-body mosquito bite.
/rant.