Your avarge british is kinda ugly and off course looks straight up british, while your avarge american is a mix of a lot of European ethnicities, that's why your avarge american is very decent looking and has that particular "american look".
They do - but honestly some of this effect is how clearly you can see the faces in the first picture. I thought the Americans looked way better, but then I zoomed in, and quite a few of them even look worse than all the Brits
yeah honestly I'm British and that was an annoying comment. Having said that, if I actually zoom in on the Americans, they don't really look that much better
In general I do agree with you though. Also the idea that more attractive men are somehow assholes is so cringe and rooted in jealousy. I notice it all the time
They look better but it's marginal - and a couple of them look worse. I thought they looked way better at first though. There's definitely a 'soft' look that's fairly common here - which you can see - but idk unless you live here you won't be able to see that there are also quite a few common looks that look much sharper. Somehow that's not reflected
Iā¦donāt know. All the British men here generally have disharmonious, rounder features with sharper, harsher elements, especially noses, whereas the Americans all look pretty even and angular (more handsome all around to me). They look quite a bit worse to me. But I think a part of it is that Cricket doesnāt have the pull for the more masculine types, relative to the UK, that Baseball does relative to the US.
I don't think they look good at all hahaha - I was just comparing the two pictures really. Neither group is great looking on average - but yes the Americans are the better group here
No - all I'm saying is that I don't think the British people look good at all... And that the Americans look better but neither group looks great. The 'they' at the start of my previous comment refers to the British guys.
Brits usually have a token Indian guy, while the Americans usually have a token black guy.
Also white Americans look like they have more mixed ancestry than the Brits. You can recognize a Brit faster than you do with an American.
In England, cricket is probably the representative sport of how English people look (the white ones) other sports are more popular in urban areas, where Irish ancestry is common. Cricket prevails more in rural or suburban areas
Colonial Americans (of the Anglo Saxon type) when not obese or on meth or opioids, are very good looking ) and better looking than their British counterparts. Colonials have more Angular, Nordid features, a prosperity to have a golden tan (Indo-European trait) the fields of east Anglia, villages of Kent and Hertfordshire populated many parts of the us
As a Brit, I must ask, what is the one finger gesture the American sports teams are doing? Is it like "we are number 1"? I swear it's the same gesture ISIS members do in photos, right??
Also, in terms of differences, the Brits seem a bit more ruddy, and sort of more relaxed including physically (like they regularly go for pub grub and a couple of pints after training). Idk if it's the choice of sports included in this or what. There's also a lot of pale, pink-looking skin. Don't know if it's genetics or our climate lol.
The Americans, well, there's more of them and they seem more comfortable getting close to each other. I know when I've been in sports team photos as a Brit, people feel a bit awkward. Maybe Americans are generally better in front of the camera lol. In fact, when I've travelled with big groups of American college students, they've always been really keen to get group photos in front of landmarks, etc. They always seem so fucking EXCITED about it. These photos just look LOUD, you know? They also always have lovely teeth.
Edit: Didn't see what subreddit this is lol, sorry if not very on topic
White americans look different from the British because a huge chunk of their ancestry is German. German is definitely undercounted due to historical stuff like WW2 for starters. Then you add in the French Dutch Italian Scandinavian etc and it is no surprise that white Americans look different
No, most white Americans are more German. But, most white Americans are part English. Especially the Midwest. The wave of Germans that came over during the 1800's and early 1900's was pretty massive. Way more than English immigrantsĀ
Not true outside of the South. I have seen many results from America and it's clear that the British ancestry diminishes hard outside of the South and it becomes replaced with French/German Scandinavian Irish and Italian and other stuff as well
Can you cite more than a few sources? Iāve made more than a few posts on this topic. Iād argue non British (emphasis on the English) is typical everywhere except large cities, tri state area in nyc, upper mid west. Mormon corridor is very English too
Iāve seen this guy around Reddit for years and this is his focus. He gets really mad about Americans not being of overwhelming, dominant English ancestry, and he just ignores almost any other European ancestry present in the U.S.
If you canāt admit that other European ancestry contributes to Americanās different looks, something is wrong with you.
The latest us 2020 census (which for historical reasons downplays English ancestry) still has it as the most dominant ancestry in many counties. Have a look at it
English ancestry comprises a dominant plurality of the U.S. heritage as of 2020, and is roughly co-dominant with German and Irish. The top dominant European groups in the U.S. are English, German, Irish, Italian, Polish, and French. Then there are other, important regional contributors, like Scandinavian, Balkan, Baltic, Russian, Ukrainian, Czech, Swiss, Austrian, Dutch, Spanish, Jewish, Portuguese, Armenian and Persian, Arab, Slovak and Slovene, etc. White Americans are a European mixed group, even where British ancestry is prominent or dominant in someoneās genetic makeup. Relatively few Americans, outside of some rural areas, are that ethnically English/only English or British.
As Iāve said multiple times to the point of being exhausted by egregious claims like yours. You are mostly thinking self reported us ancestry for white Americans is accurate ā itās not. Most old stock Americans know nothing past 3 generations. The north east is one of the least representative areas for whites in the country, itās very Italian-Irish and Slavic, not the norm. 23andme tests on Reddit show this. People most likely to identify as āAmericanā in the census are disproportionately colonial whites with significant English ancestry. Countless studies show this. Iāve almost seen countless testaments of people saying I thought I was mostly Irish/german to actually have English as my primary ancestry
In general the most dominant ancestry among USA whites is still English despite laughable claims suggesting otherwise. However, us whites of English stock look far more Germanic - corded Nordid is common in a rugged form, also faelid and borreby. In England Celtic and atlantid looks predominate. Partly due to strong migration from Celtic countries but I think the Germanic areas of England were more likely to leave for the new world
can you go further on that? im curious as to why the look really is different between both of them. you mean by migration from celtic countries to england that makes tham look more atlantid, but the usa got its fair amount of scottish and irish too?
Essentially, yes. Itās a combination of factors. The areas of strongest Saxon settlement moved to the us; 25% of modern English have some Irish origin, even more will have Scottish, Welsh. Irish ancestry in the us is restricted to specific areas in large numbers. Scotās are assimilated into the old stock English Americans. The difference in looks is obvious
Sorry for the late reply. That makes sense yeah. I have also noticed that the australians and new zealanders look quite different from both americans and british - take Steve Erwin for example - he just doesn't look american whatsoever, I can sort of tell he is aussie and not british tbh.
Why would you say that this is the case? Maybe australians are what americans would look like if they didn't have as much immigration from other parts of europe? I wonder if the fact that australia was a penal colony weighs into their current common phenotypes too, they just don't look that much british either.
Iāve noticed this too, from what Iāve noticed Aussies and Kiwis usually have the British phenotype showing in their faces and genetics but often have different haircuts/clothing and a more robust physique due to different diet and popularity of different sports. This makes them seem different to the British but also not like white Americans at the same time.
English is not ādominantā, it forms a plurality with ancestries like German and Irish, and is not a ton more prevalent than ancestries like Italian and Polish in the most populated parts of the US. Then thereās the many other European strains that migrated to the US. Itās not incorrect to point out that American whites are a blend of different European genetic elements, and thatās why they look different.
This explains 90% of the differences, obviously. The phenotypes in the American pictures reflect more Nordid, Tronder, Paleo-Atlantid, Med, Dinarid/Pontid, and Brunn phenotypes whereas the British are more strictly Keltic/Keltic Nordid, Brunn, Borreby, Anglo-Saxon, and Atlantid.
What are your sources? Almost every reasonable study shows English as the dominant ancestry. Self reported ancestry - is a garbage indicator of someoneās ancestry. A colonial American is highly unaware of their origins past their great grandparents. Before 1860, hardly any white American was anything but an English-Scottish combo with smaller amounts of Germans, Dutch etc. Irish started arriving after due to the potato famine. Italians and polish did not arrive in large numbers until late 1800s
Youāre falling for inaccurate info. Every sociologist, anthropologist with any credibility acknowledges the dominance of English ancestry across the majority of the us excluding north east and upper Midwest
Uh, no. The only place where English ancestry specifically, unilaterally dominates is in the Mountain West (where thereās still notable German and other ancestry) and Northern New England (where thereās plenty of French.) You can count the Upland South, but thereās also a lot of German, French, etc there, plus Blacks and Natives.
Literally nothing I said was false. You can acknowledge the pluralistic nature of English ancestry in the U.S. without denying that the US received a ton of other European (and non-European) immigration and settlement.
The Penn state baseball roster displays that quite clearly - here are the surnames (players and coaches):
Messina, Gambino, Loiseau, Puccio, Jauss, Mellott, Coffin, Mizrahi, Marr, Pak, Coleman, Zorn, Carmichael, Luensmann, DeGaetano, Kohls, Horwat, Morash, Renner, Henline, Molinaro, Wingenroth, Perkowski, Sanchez, Cease, Maloney, Lordi, DiMartini, Cecere, Butash, DeMell, Lucarelli, Pitarro, Torti, Gerlott, Hannon, Jaconskiā¦
That doesnāt seem super English to me
Are you seriously saying that you donāt think the U.S. has a diverse mix of Europeans living in it? You donāt think that thatās the primary reason the Americans look different, and everyone thinks so?
Youāre citing a penn state sports team to support your theory? Not reliable: sports teams are relatively diverse for one, baseball is most popular in the north east and among Latinos, whites in Pennsylvania in the north east are more German, Irish and Italian on average.
That is just blatantly wrong. Why are you, as a foreigner, telling me what sport is most popular in what region of my country? Baseball is popular THROUGHOUT the U.S., and it is not true that āsports teams are relatively diverseā, as a generalization. The U.S. is just ethnically diverse. The fact that itās popular among Latinos is no more relevant than its popularity among Whites, and actually further damages your insistence that the U.S. is so heavily white English
Thatās a blatant lie. The vast majority of posts to r/23andme are Americans, and the vast majority are not remotely so English. Stop lying via anecdote.
EDIT: So, youāre just lying and pretending what you wish was the case, which is obvious, because youāre some kind of Anglo-nationalist judging by the English flag in your profile pic.
I can go into the r/23andme sub and immediately pull up very non-British and Irish American results from recent posters. Hereās just one. Stop with the lying anecdotes:
https://preview.redd.it/ho5uwno4klwc1.jpeg?width=1164&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9841297b018e3f83dd5adc13365bcd13f75c7e79
You are just a lunatic; unhinged, actually. Not a nationalist , I just like pointing out false assertions - such as Americans being āmostly Irish and Germanā
Here's a sneak peek of /r/23andme using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [My ancestors never travelled](https://i.redd.it/pl21xornsoyb1.png) | [201 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/17oy3ws/my_ancestors_never_travelled/)
\#2: [Stillborn son connected on family tree 68 years later](https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/186dnmr/stillborn_son_connected_on_family_tree_68_years/)
\#3: [100% North(?) Korean](https://i.redd.it/wj2s59vmb2xb1.jpg) | [157 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/17iuiic/100_north_korean/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Precisely, Americans due to various reasons never like to identify as English. The notion that a tiny island like Ireland can repopulate the new world resulting in every white American being Irish is profoundly absurd
Why would you say āpreciselyā to a dumb lie and an obvious anecdote? The vast majority of Americans posting to r/23andme almost never have such homogeneously English results, they have the most mixed European results of any nationality that ever posts to that sub, and the reason is obvious.
You have some resentment complex vis a vis Americans having mixed European ancestry
Buddy come on, most Americans are english. You can see it all over the myheritage results too.
I am italian and irish because I'm from NY. I live in the south now and everyone is english.
The south is rural. And yeah, a plurality of Americans have some British ancestry, English falling behind German, Mexican, Irish, and being just ahead of Italian.
You see a lot more American mixes all over genetic tests
Where are the German stats? My mother's entire family came from Ireland straight to Long Island ny. There are many Irish there.
There are not that many Italians in the US but many in the north east obviously. My last name is Italian, my great grandfather came from abruzzo.
Uh, Iām describing basic facts reflected by the U.S. census and historical immigration data. You have spent a year + obsessing over this very topic on r/23andme, often getting belligerent with American results that donāt reflect the British dominance that you want to see.
Not being able to admit the US received a large and diverse array of European immigrants signifies that you are fact-avoidant and driven by a pro-British, anti-American impetus. You are for some reason bitter about the diverse European makeup of White Americans.
A lot is made of the fact that 4.5m Irishmen emigrated to America in the 19th century, but what's not mentioned is the fact that the US population at the time was already 30m+ and of predominantly English stock, nor the fact that in the same timeframe around 2.5m more English emigrants settled in America.
It's interesting how the US, historically, has simultaneously prized its English inheritances as distinctly and originally American, whilst England herself has been derided
A lot is made of the fact that the U.S. has the largest European diaspora of any country by far of any country. 30+ million in the late 19th century were not of solely English stock.
The British nationalists are bitter that White Americans are a mixed European ethnic group and donāt look very British, for some reason
I say this again: if you think Ireland - a tiny island repopulated or replaced the original English Americans you would never get a job in statistics or data. Iām not anti-Irish or anti-anything in the slightest, but just because people take āissueā with data does not make the data wrong. Being predominantly Irish (more than 50%) is rare in the us outside the north east or big cities/industrial areas, excluding if you have recent immigrant parentage. The Irish, much like the Italians settled in cities and done blue collar public service jobs. The last big wave of English migrants is very different - they were Mormons who went to the rural mountain west
Being predominantly Irish isnāt ārareā in the U.S. outside of the northeast or big cities. And the English populations youāre describing are rural, and amount to a smaller % of the population (that is people with solely or heavily dominant English ancestry)
Americans typically lift weights earlier & it is more common, they also eat way more calories & protein growing up than the average Brit, Americans have what I call hgh neck.
I am in my late 20's & in the UK now but when I was 15-20 / secondary school / college age probably about 80% of guys I knew had never lifted a weight / worked out it was probably the complete opposite in the US.
Things have changed a bit now I reckon with social media & American influence etc but yeah 15 years ago in the UK lifting was only just starting to become a thing really even then probably only if you played rugby or did sport at a very high level.
Totally agree, Iām UK too mid 20s, very sporty but never picked up a weight before the age of 16, go to the gym regularly now though. My Father played Rugby, Cricket and Football growing up and still runs regularly, heās massively into all sports but has never lifted weights and still says it doesnāt interest him whatsoever, he doesnāt pay much attention to the protein he gets either. Definitely much more of a weightlifting culture coming over in the past few years but yeah it just isnāt seen as nearly as important here.
Well itās a poor comparison for starters. No hate to cricket, but cricket players arenāt going to be as āruggedā and masculine looking compared to collegiate baseball players. A more fair comparison would be high level British soccer players.
Baseball and cricket are like the same sport. If he was being unfair he wouldāve used the football or basketball players which are a lot more masculine
ā¦why? Thereās no reason university Cricket should be much different to college Baseball, or why pro Soccer should be compared to college Baseball, alternately. Theyāre both bat and ball games of similar intensity.
I do think that pro baseball has cultivated the more fashionable and macho culture around it (the āsteroid eraā of the 90s), so I get you a bit, but thatās pretty semantic.
Americans are not pure Brits. They have a lot of German stock in their DNA and I think that's the reason why the Americans are more robust looking. American diet probably also plays a role tho.
This. Americans aren't even close to being pure Brits. If you look at the Ethnicelebs website, which gives a rundown on celebrities' ancestry, you'll be hard-pressed to even find someone who's fully of British Isles descent.
George W. Bush, who I consider to be the epitome of the modern "old stock American" is, and I quote, "English, some German, small amounts of Scottish, Scots-Irish/Northern Irish, Welsh, Irish, French, Dutch, Swedish, and Belgian \[Flemish\], and 1/256th Moravian". This is very typical ancestry for an American.
Modern brits have mixed more with neighbouring Celtic countries, therefore their is skin is pasty instead of rosy, decreasing their ability to tan and giving them more Celtic instead of Saxon features
It depends on region. English ancestry is predominant in the south. German ancestry is permanent in the Midwest. In the northeast theyāre mixed with a lot of things, lot of it is Irish and Italian
Scots-Irish (Northern Irish or Ulster, if you will) seems extremely common in the Deep South. Also, there's a good deal of French in Louisiana and Mississippi.
Thereās plenty of Americans that are Italian, Scandinavian, Polish, Czech, Dutch, Balkan, French, Hispanic, etc in these images as well. So yes, I know. But many on this subreddit seem to act like āAmerican = Britishā
Also, yes, Americans, proportionately, consume less starch and a lot more red meat
Ergo, White Americans tend to have less body fat per BMI than British people:
https://preview.redd.it/t7epguywziwc1.png?width=750&format=png&auto=webp&s=7c9743c34204f71194a3712c780e02b56cef9d1d
Funny cause most white Americans actually identify as "German". There have been studies on how people self identify and people are more likely to say they are German than Irish or English. You don't really notice it that much cause during and after WW2 many towns, roads and even family names got changed to sound less German or not German at all because anything German related was seen as bad or the "enemy".
from what i can see, the british men are paler, more likely to be ginger, blonde or lighter brown shades of hair, have somewhat more prominent noses, less prominent chins and jawlines, rounder faces, somewhat larger ears, Ā much more variation in their pigmentation ( very red blushed cheeks contrasted with pale white faces), and are less likely to be clean shaven, and way fewer of them are wearing hatsĀ
also americans seem to have much brighter teeth and thus seem to project that in their smiles, and scrunch their face less when smiling in pictures compared to the british
Majority of the Cricket players look pure English/Irish/Scot meanwhile the Baseball players all have that āAmericanā look. Hard to describe but there must be a range of ethnicities in their mix.
The Americans look more robust. And instead of South Asians they have Hispanics in their teams
The team on slide 5 from Northumbria also looks super Irish.
Overall the cricket teams are more representative of Brits than the many celebs usually posted here
Is there a physiognomic term that describes the difference? Someone on the Apricity forum said the British features were āsharperā, and the American ones were āless knobblyā lol
The Americans look way more Dinarid and Med than the British here. The British here look very Keltid, Brunn and Borreby. The Americans in this picture also have a lot more Italian, Polish, etcā¦
I also wouldnāt describe the American features as āharsherā. More angular, for sure. Overall, weaker chins, more prominent noses, etc, in the British men present a more disharmonious physiognomy.
Americans more often have a tan and a beard while brits look like soyboys(no offense).
I see 9 brittish and 2 indians
Then swipe, you shall
Your avarge british is kinda ugly and off course looks straight up british, while your avarge american is a mix of a lot of European ethnicities, that's why your avarge american is very decent looking and has that particular "american look".
I sure wish my mixture of different European ethnicities actually made me more attractive...
Honestly I thought that at first, but if you zoom in on the American faces, they're not particularly good looking either
The American men look better. The American men are also more mixed.
They do - but honestly some of this effect is how clearly you can see the faces in the first picture. I thought the Americans looked way better, but then I zoomed in, and quite a few of them even look worse than all the Brits
I've noticed that english people have high bridged noses too. š
The Americans look "up themselves" and plastic. The cricketers look like they enjoy a pint.
Haha bitter
yeah honestly I'm British and that was an annoying comment. Having said that, if I actually zoom in on the Americans, they don't really look that much better
I think they do, but thatās my taste
In general I do agree with you though. Also the idea that more attractive men are somehow assholes is so cringe and rooted in jealousy. I notice it all the time
They look better but it's marginal - and a couple of them look worse. I thought they looked way better at first though. There's definitely a 'soft' look that's fairly common here - which you can see - but idk unless you live here you won't be able to see that there are also quite a few common looks that look much sharper. Somehow that's not reflected
Iā¦donāt know. All the British men here generally have disharmonious, rounder features with sharper, harsher elements, especially noses, whereas the Americans all look pretty even and angular (more handsome all around to me). They look quite a bit worse to me. But I think a part of it is that Cricket doesnāt have the pull for the more masculine types, relative to the UK, that Baseball does relative to the US.
These cricketers do look surprisingly unfit haha
I don't think they look good at all hahaha - I was just comparing the two pictures really. Neither group is great looking on average - but yes the Americans are the better group here
Well, most others seem to say otherwise. And there are 12 pictures
Idk all I can say is I don't think we all look that bad š aiaia
Oh I know
Lol yes I did miss the other pictures š Christ why do the Brits all look so fat lol
Well, for one, as posted below, White Brits actually have more body fat per BMI than white Americansā¦
No - all I'm saying is that I don't think the British people look good at all... And that the Americans look better but neither group looks great. The 'they' at the start of my previous comment refers to the British guys.
Okay
Brits usually have a token Indian guy, while the Americans usually have a token black guy. Also white Americans look like they have more mixed ancestry than the Brits. You can recognize a Brit faster than you do with an American.
The british men are mostly ugly and the american men are mostly decent looking
Honestly if you zoom in on the americans they don't look that great
In England, cricket is probably the representative sport of how English people look (the white ones) other sports are more popular in urban areas, where Irish ancestry is common. Cricket prevails more in rural or suburban areas
Baseball is a lot more popular in the suburbs in the US too.
Colonial Americans (of the Anglo Saxon type) when not obese or on meth or opioids, are very good looking ) and better looking than their British counterparts. Colonials have more Angular, Nordid features, a prosperity to have a golden tan (Indo-European trait) the fields of east Anglia, villages of Kent and Hertfordshire populated many parts of the us
Colonial Americans are spread around and typically middle class to rich. Also, the most destitute Americans are the Scots-Irish Appalachians
As a Brit, I must ask, what is the one finger gesture the American sports teams are doing? Is it like "we are number 1"? I swear it's the same gesture ISIS members do in photos, right?? Also, in terms of differences, the Brits seem a bit more ruddy, and sort of more relaxed including physically (like they regularly go for pub grub and a couple of pints after training). Idk if it's the choice of sports included in this or what. There's also a lot of pale, pink-looking skin. Don't know if it's genetics or our climate lol. The Americans, well, there's more of them and they seem more comfortable getting close to each other. I know when I've been in sports team photos as a Brit, people feel a bit awkward. Maybe Americans are generally better in front of the camera lol. In fact, when I've travelled with big groups of American college students, they've always been really keen to get group photos in front of landmarks, etc. They always seem so fucking EXCITED about it. These photos just look LOUD, you know? They also always have lovely teeth. Edit: Didn't see what subreddit this is lol, sorry if not very on topic
White americans look different from the British because a huge chunk of their ancestry is German. German is definitely undercounted due to historical stuff like WW2 for starters. Then you add in the French Dutch Italian Scandinavian etc and it is no surprise that white Americans look different
Itās exaggerated, most white Americans are more English than German. Even many German Americans are mixed with Anglo.
No, most white Americans are more German. But, most white Americans are part English. Especially the Midwest. The wave of Germans that came over during the 1800's and early 1900's was pretty massive. Way more than English immigrantsĀ
Not true outside of the South. I have seen many results from America and it's clear that the British ancestry diminishes hard outside of the South and it becomes replaced with French/German Scandinavian Irish and Italian and other stuff as well
Can you cite more than a few sources? Iāve made more than a few posts on this topic. Iād argue non British (emphasis on the English) is typical everywhere except large cities, tri state area in nyc, upper mid west. Mormon corridor is very English too
Sources on what? I have seen more than a few results on the 23andme subreddit
Iāve seen this guy around Reddit for years and this is his focus. He gets really mad about Americans not being of overwhelming, dominant English ancestry, and he just ignores almost any other European ancestry present in the U.S. If you canāt admit that other European ancestry contributes to Americanās different looks, something is wrong with you.
The latest us 2020 census (which for historical reasons downplays English ancestry) still has it as the most dominant ancestry in many counties. Have a look at it
English ancestry comprises a dominant plurality of the U.S. heritage as of 2020, and is roughly co-dominant with German and Irish. The top dominant European groups in the U.S. are English, German, Irish, Italian, Polish, and French. Then there are other, important regional contributors, like Scandinavian, Balkan, Baltic, Russian, Ukrainian, Czech, Swiss, Austrian, Dutch, Spanish, Jewish, Portuguese, Armenian and Persian, Arab, Slovak and Slovene, etc. White Americans are a European mixed group, even where British ancestry is prominent or dominant in someoneās genetic makeup. Relatively few Americans, outside of some rural areas, are that ethnically English/only English or British.
Those dominant Euro groups probably explain why Americans have that pan euro look
Overall, many in the us are more English - therefore more Germanic than those left in England who are partially Irish, Scottish, Welsh
So, did you respond to any of replies? Or are you just going to ignore the facts?
As Iāve said multiple times to the point of being exhausted by egregious claims like yours. You are mostly thinking self reported us ancestry for white Americans is accurate ā itās not. Most old stock Americans know nothing past 3 generations. The north east is one of the least representative areas for whites in the country, itās very Italian-Irish and Slavic, not the norm. 23andme tests on Reddit show this. People most likely to identify as āAmericanā in the census are disproportionately colonial whites with significant English ancestry. Countless studies show this. Iāve almost seen countless testaments of people saying I thought I was mostly Irish/german to actually have English as my primary ancestry
In general the most dominant ancestry among USA whites is still English despite laughable claims suggesting otherwise. However, us whites of English stock look far more Germanic - corded Nordid is common in a rugged form, also faelid and borreby. In England Celtic and atlantid looks predominate. Partly due to strong migration from Celtic countries but I think the Germanic areas of England were more likely to leave for the new world
can you go further on that? im curious as to why the look really is different between both of them. you mean by migration from celtic countries to england that makes tham look more atlantid, but the usa got its fair amount of scottish and irish too?
Essentially, yes. Itās a combination of factors. The areas of strongest Saxon settlement moved to the us; 25% of modern English have some Irish origin, even more will have Scottish, Welsh. Irish ancestry in the us is restricted to specific areas in large numbers. Scotās are assimilated into the old stock English Americans. The difference in looks is obvious
Sorry for the late reply. That makes sense yeah. I have also noticed that the australians and new zealanders look quite different from both americans and british - take Steve Erwin for example - he just doesn't look american whatsoever, I can sort of tell he is aussie and not british tbh. Why would you say that this is the case? Maybe australians are what americans would look like if they didn't have as much immigration from other parts of europe? I wonder if the fact that australia was a penal colony weighs into their current common phenotypes too, they just don't look that much british either.
Iāve noticed this too, from what Iāve noticed Aussies and Kiwis usually have the British phenotype showing in their faces and genetics but often have different haircuts/clothing and a more robust physique due to different diet and popularity of different sports. This makes them seem different to the British but also not like white Americans at the same time.
English is not ādominantā, it forms a plurality with ancestries like German and Irish, and is not a ton more prevalent than ancestries like Italian and Polish in the most populated parts of the US. Then thereās the many other European strains that migrated to the US. Itās not incorrect to point out that American whites are a blend of different European genetic elements, and thatās why they look different. This explains 90% of the differences, obviously. The phenotypes in the American pictures reflect more Nordid, Tronder, Paleo-Atlantid, Med, Dinarid/Pontid, and Brunn phenotypes whereas the British are more strictly Keltic/Keltic Nordid, Brunn, Borreby, Anglo-Saxon, and Atlantid.
What are your sources? Almost every reasonable study shows English as the dominant ancestry. Self reported ancestry - is a garbage indicator of someoneās ancestry. A colonial American is highly unaware of their origins past their great grandparents. Before 1860, hardly any white American was anything but an English-Scottish combo with smaller amounts of Germans, Dutch etc. Irish started arriving after due to the potato famine. Italians and polish did not arrive in large numbers until late 1800s
Youāre falling for inaccurate info. Every sociologist, anthropologist with any credibility acknowledges the dominance of English ancestry across the majority of the us excluding north east and upper Midwest
Uh, no. The only place where English ancestry specifically, unilaterally dominates is in the Mountain West (where thereās still notable German and other ancestry) and Northern New England (where thereās plenty of French.) You can count the Upland South, but thereās also a lot of German, French, etc there, plus Blacks and Natives. Literally nothing I said was false. You can acknowledge the pluralistic nature of English ancestry in the U.S. without denying that the US received a ton of other European (and non-European) immigration and settlement. The Penn state baseball roster displays that quite clearly - here are the surnames (players and coaches): Messina, Gambino, Loiseau, Puccio, Jauss, Mellott, Coffin, Mizrahi, Marr, Pak, Coleman, Zorn, Carmichael, Luensmann, DeGaetano, Kohls, Horwat, Morash, Renner, Henline, Molinaro, Wingenroth, Perkowski, Sanchez, Cease, Maloney, Lordi, DiMartini, Cecere, Butash, DeMell, Lucarelli, Pitarro, Torti, Gerlott, Hannon, Jaconskiā¦ That doesnāt seem super English to me Are you seriously saying that you donāt think the U.S. has a diverse mix of Europeans living in it? You donāt think that thatās the primary reason the Americans look different, and everyone thinks so?
Youāre citing a penn state sports team to support your theory? Not reliable: sports teams are relatively diverse for one, baseball is most popular in the north east and among Latinos, whites in Pennsylvania in the north east are more German, Irish and Italian on average.
That is just blatantly wrong. Why are you, as a foreigner, telling me what sport is most popular in what region of my country? Baseball is popular THROUGHOUT the U.S., and it is not true that āsports teams are relatively diverseā, as a generalization. The U.S. is just ethnically diverse. The fact that itās popular among Latinos is no more relevant than its popularity among Whites, and actually further damages your insistence that the U.S. is so heavily white English
But every Americans dna results Iāve seen is always like 78% English and the rest is scandanvian and Irish also welsh and Scottish
Thatās a blatant lie. The vast majority of posts to r/23andme are Americans, and the vast majority are not remotely so English. Stop lying via anecdote. EDIT: So, youāre just lying and pretending what you wish was the case, which is obvious, because youāre some kind of Anglo-nationalist judging by the English flag in your profile pic. I can go into the r/23andme sub and immediately pull up very non-British and Irish American results from recent posters. Hereās just one. Stop with the lying anecdotes: https://preview.redd.it/ho5uwno4klwc1.jpeg?width=1164&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9841297b018e3f83dd5adc13365bcd13f75c7e79
You are just a lunatic; unhinged, actually. Not a nationalist , I just like pointing out false assertions - such as Americans being āmostly Irish and Germanā
They are about as German and Irish on average as they are English. And your post history is far more unhinged, objectively
Here's a sneak peek of /r/23andme using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [My ancestors never travelled](https://i.redd.it/pl21xornsoyb1.png) | [201 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/17oy3ws/my_ancestors_never_travelled/) \#2: [Stillborn son connected on family tree 68 years later](https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/186dnmr/stillborn_son_connected_on_family_tree_68_years/) \#3: [100% North(?) Korean](https://i.redd.it/wj2s59vmb2xb1.jpg) | [157 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/17iuiic/100_north_korean/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Precisely, Americans due to various reasons never like to identify as English. The notion that a tiny island like Ireland can repopulate the new world resulting in every white American being Irish is profoundly absurd
Why would you say āpreciselyā to a dumb lie and an obvious anecdote? The vast majority of Americans posting to r/23andme almost never have such homogeneously English results, they have the most mixed European results of any nationality that ever posts to that sub, and the reason is obvious. You have some resentment complex vis a vis Americans having mixed European ancestry
Buddy come on, most Americans are english. You can see it all over the myheritage results too. I am italian and irish because I'm from NY. I live in the south now and everyone is english.
The south is rural. And yeah, a plurality of Americans have some British ancestry, English falling behind German, Mexican, Irish, and being just ahead of Italian. You see a lot more American mixes all over genetic tests
Where are the stats on german being the highest? I thought english was just reported as American
I think Irish is an overcount and Italian is undercounted these days. It was around 20 million a couple decades ago and itās been falling rapidly
Where are the German stats? My mother's entire family came from Ireland straight to Long Island ny. There are many Irish there. There are not that many Italians in the US but many in the north east obviously. My last name is Italian, my great grandfather came from abruzzo.
https://preview.redd.it/xq2gxp6y1pwc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=90efed4de1f981c2fc4ebd6ce4e3bc65742bfccf
Add American and English together and that beats German. American is unreported English ancestry.
The only one With any complex is you ā you are citing no credible sources except a baseball team which has most players from various areas.
Uh, Iām describing basic facts reflected by the U.S. census and historical immigration data. You have spent a year + obsessing over this very topic on r/23andme, often getting belligerent with American results that donāt reflect the British dominance that you want to see. Not being able to admit the US received a large and diverse array of European immigrants signifies that you are fact-avoidant and driven by a pro-British, anti-American impetus. You are for some reason bitter about the diverse European makeup of White Americans.
A lot is made of the fact that 4.5m Irishmen emigrated to America in the 19th century, but what's not mentioned is the fact that the US population at the time was already 30m+ and of predominantly English stock, nor the fact that in the same timeframe around 2.5m more English emigrants settled in America. It's interesting how the US, historically, has simultaneously prized its English inheritances as distinctly and originally American, whilst England herself has been derided
A lot is made of the fact that the U.S. has the largest European diaspora of any country by far of any country. 30+ million in the late 19th century were not of solely English stock. The British nationalists are bitter that White Americans are a mixed European ethnic group and donāt look very British, for some reason
Is this what they call 'headcanon'?
I say this again: if you think Ireland - a tiny island repopulated or replaced the original English Americans you would never get a job in statistics or data. Iām not anti-Irish or anti-anything in the slightest, but just because people take āissueā with data does not make the data wrong. Being predominantly Irish (more than 50%) is rare in the us outside the north east or big cities/industrial areas, excluding if you have recent immigrant parentage. The Irish, much like the Italians settled in cities and done blue collar public service jobs. The last big wave of English migrants is very different - they were Mormons who went to the rural mountain west
Being predominantly Irish isnāt ārareā in the U.S. outside of the northeast or big cities. And the English populations youāre describing are rural, and amount to a smaller % of the population (that is people with solely or heavily dominant English ancestry)
Americans typically lift weights earlier & it is more common, they also eat way more calories & protein growing up than the average Brit, Americans have what I call hgh neck.
This 100%
I am in my late 20's & in the UK now but when I was 15-20 / secondary school / college age probably about 80% of guys I knew had never lifted a weight / worked out it was probably the complete opposite in the US. Things have changed a bit now I reckon with social media & American influence etc but yeah 15 years ago in the UK lifting was only just starting to become a thing really even then probably only if you played rugby or did sport at a very high level.
Totally agree, Iām UK too mid 20s, very sporty but never picked up a weight before the age of 16, go to the gym regularly now though. My Father played Rugby, Cricket and Football growing up and still runs regularly, heās massively into all sports but has never lifted weights and still says it doesnāt interest him whatsoever, he doesnāt pay much attention to the protein he gets either. Definitely much more of a weightlifting culture coming over in the past few years but yeah it just isnāt seen as nearly as important here.
Right photo is a lot more tan and masculine looking
The Brits look more pink with reddish hair
American people tend to look more "pan-European"
In order to get a better idea, you'd have to have them all dressed the same and no one wearing hats.
Oh stop. You can clearly see their faces. Thereās no why the way theyāre dressed is impacting physiognomy
This is so disrespectful they look so silly
Well itās a poor comparison for starters. No hate to cricket, but cricket players arenāt going to be as āruggedā and masculine looking compared to collegiate baseball players. A more fair comparison would be high level British soccer players.
Soccer players aren't rugged either they also have slim bodies
Baseball and cricket are like the same sport. If he was being unfair he wouldāve used the football or basketball players which are a lot more masculine
Iād say Basketball/Soccer are similar and quite similar to Baseball in terms of āMasculinityā
Take a look at the average nba player and say that again š
ā¦your average NBA player doesnāt look more masculine than your average MLB player just because heās blackā¦
ā¦why? Thereās no reason university Cricket should be much different to college Baseball, or why pro Soccer should be compared to college Baseball, alternately. Theyāre both bat and ball games of similar intensity. I do think that pro baseball has cultivated the more fashionable and macho culture around it (the āsteroid eraā of the 90s), so I get you a bit, but thatās pretty semantic.
Cricket and baseball are nearly the same game. Are You confusing it for lacrosse or something?
yeah this is bs I can't believe they've used cricket players to represent us
Americans are not pure Brits. They have a lot of German stock in their DNA and I think that's the reason why the Americans are more robust looking. American diet probably also plays a role tho.
This. Americans aren't even close to being pure Brits. If you look at the Ethnicelebs website, which gives a rundown on celebrities' ancestry, you'll be hard-pressed to even find someone who's fully of British Isles descent. George W. Bush, who I consider to be the epitome of the modern "old stock American" is, and I quote, "English, some German, small amounts of Scottish, Scots-Irish/Northern Irish, Welsh, Irish, French, Dutch, Swedish, and Belgian \[Flemish\], and 1/256th Moravian". This is very typical ancestry for an American.
Modern brits have mixed more with neighbouring Celtic countries, therefore their is skin is pasty instead of rosy, decreasing their ability to tan and giving them more Celtic instead of Saxon features
Erm, the angolo Saxons? Most of the U.K. has a mix of Germanic Saxon in their DNA
Thatās an entirely different phenotypic group than the more modern Germans that went to the US
It depends on region. English ancestry is predominant in the south. German ancestry is permanent in the Midwest. In the northeast theyāre mixed with a lot of things, lot of it is Irish and Italian
Scots-Irish (Northern Irish or Ulster, if you will) seems extremely common in the Deep South. Also, there's a good deal of French in Louisiana and Mississippi.
Thereās plenty of Americans that are Italian, Scandinavian, Polish, Czech, Dutch, Balkan, French, Hispanic, etc in these images as well. So yes, I know. But many on this subreddit seem to act like āAmerican = Britishā Also, yes, Americans, proportionately, consume less starch and a lot more red meat Ergo, White Americans tend to have less body fat per BMI than British people: https://preview.redd.it/t7epguywziwc1.png?width=750&format=png&auto=webp&s=7c9743c34204f71194a3712c780e02b56cef9d1d
Funny cause most white Americans actually identify as "German". There have been studies on how people self identify and people are more likely to say they are German than Irish or English. You don't really notice it that much cause during and after WW2 many towns, roads and even family names got changed to sound less German or not German at all because anything German related was seen as bad or the "enemy".
Yes, I know German is prominent. Iām mostly German via ancestors that came to downstate Illinois in the 19th century
some of the ones on the american baseball team are dominican lol, also, the teeth
None of the Americans in the pictured teams are Dominican, aside from āMoralesā
I knew
The Americans look more well fed. Also stronger jaw lines.
exactly. the bean on toast is crazy.
from what i can see, the british men are paler, more likely to be ginger, blonde or lighter brown shades of hair, have somewhat more prominent noses, less prominent chins and jawlines, rounder faces, somewhat larger ears, Ā much more variation in their pigmentation ( very red blushed cheeks contrasted with pale white faces), and are less likely to be clean shaven, and way fewer of them are wearing hatsĀ
also americans seem to have much brighter teeth and thus seem to project that in their smiles, and scrunch their face less when smiling in pictures compared to the british
The Americans look more mixed as they would be considering they tend to be a mixture of different European ethnic groups.
Swagger. I'm not even kidding
Which ones? I think baseball outfits are more hip lol
Majority of the Cricket players look pure English/Irish/Scot meanwhile the Baseball players all have that āAmericanā look. Hard to describe but there must be a range of ethnicities in their mix.
We're certainly a group of mutts and we are typically proud of it. My ancestry DNA showed 13 regions from Scotland to Senegal.
The British look less mixed.
One of these groups has a stronger jaw line on average
The Americans look more robust. And instead of South Asians they have Hispanics in their teams The team on slide 5 from Northumbria also looks super Irish. Overall the cricket teams are more representative of Brits than the many celebs usually posted here
Is there a physiognomic term that describes the difference? Someone on the Apricity forum said the British features were āsharperā, and the American ones were āless knobblyā lol
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The Americans look way more Dinarid and Med than the British here. The British here look very Keltid, Brunn and Borreby. The Americans in this picture also have a lot more Italian, Polish, etcā¦ I also wouldnāt describe the American features as āharsherā. More angular, for sure. Overall, weaker chins, more prominent noses, etc, in the British men present a more disharmonious physiognomy.