I'm curious on why they looks so unique and stands out very much from other groups of people. If it's because of they having a different ancestry history, if it's climate reasons (evolutionary) or something like that? I'm curious if they've been isolated more than other groups of people. Just curious in the same way I'm curious on why Sub-Saharan Africans have often nappy hair and Nordic people are tall! #Aboriginal#AustralianAboriginal#Natives#Unique
Updates
+1 y
Too lazy to choose MHO.
Why do many Australian aboriginals have unique facial features?
Well first I should point out that Australia has a history of enslaving the aboriginal people. Also they are the ones calling you unique, they are the original inhabitants (hence the name) of Australia, which makes sense given their ebony complexion because Australia receives a lot of sun exposure, thus requiring more pigment. The paler complexion inhabitants are foreigners that went on their land, British colonization. It is similar to Native Americans in The United States. If there is a mixed look to them I am not surprised that during enslavement the women were raped by the British and had their heterogeneous babies (the reason for straighter and longer hair maybe). Lastly, "nappy" is an informal and offensive term. Their hair is "natural" how God made it, no human's standard. If they looked aged it's inherited from ancestors working hard in the hot sun as a slave, miss treated. Hardship can do that to a person and race, the burden, the knowledge.
You should read history that was not written and/or published by communist Jews. I have a degree from an Australian university as an English and history teacher. What you wrote was largely incorrect, but is the narrative lie that is parroted by communists and their useful idiots. For example, Aborigines were not “enslaved”. They were paid, although not terribly well in most cases. Employment of Aborigines was avoided in all but the pastoral industry, because they were lazy and troublesome. Ask anyone who has lived around Aborigines, which I have. That was why Polynesians amd Melanesians were imported as contract labour in the sugar cane industry, at least for a while. If there had been a suitable source of labour locally, nobody would have gone to the expense and effort of importing farm workers. It should also be noted that much of Australia was in a state of war (between the Aborigines and the British colonists) until about 1900.
@cth96190 That's what Americans say about the history of slavery in their country, but there is evidence, most destroyed but you can't erase the slave's memories. There is other scrutinizing events that occurred in history that people tried to cover up or deny, anything for a clean image.
@Negrodamu5 slavery was never fashionable in Australia, the American war for independence helped that, England had more serious problems with population control, poverty and crowded jails. Slavery was Abolished in 1833 because of white activists in Europe and America. But the movement had been growing to ban it from the late 1700's Cook landed on Aussie Shores in 1778, first convicts to land in Sydney was 1788. By convicts you might as well say white slaves, Aborigines got reduced to dust more by foreign disease than warfare. Either way they would not lay down their weapons, type of people to fight to the death. So no slavery was not common in Australia and at the time was starting to be considered evil by all European nations. Read up about the Abolition movement, watch a movie called tracker, that will give you a good idea about what Aborigines are like, cleaver and also tough people.
www.nationalgeographic.com/.../ Ever heard of Partus sequitur ventrem? This is a National Geographic article that talks of the miss treatment and slavery of the Aboriginal Australians people, treated according to there race, history repeats itself time and time again. Here is another article: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Australians They definitely were not treated equal and had close to no rights and the article speaks of another issue, it is embedded in the text but pay attention to the key word "paternity". I could give you more sources, but there is no need because you know the truth. Show me some articles of the contrary and I might be able to explain more clearly where your information is wrong so you can understand the facts.
www.abc.net.au/.../5580456 Another article, the list goes one, they did not have the same rights as the British colonist and the British would not have liked to be treated the way the Aboriginal Australians were. (1916) Why are you calling them unique anyways, amongst them they are typical and they most likely question you and call you unique, who is to say what is the norm and what is different? They are natives to Australia, the British are immigrants of Australia, foreigners, so if anybody's standards...
I didn't know "nappy" was an offensive term. I thought the word "nappy" meant "very curly hair" and that it was more curly than other curly hair textures.
It's an informal terminology that can also be defined as diaper in the British old language, I tried to see the pros but no nappy especially in America amongst those who have naturally curly hair prefer just that the word natural or curly. Nappy in America is more of an insult, like she doesn't do her hair her hair is nappy, got all those naps (tangles, knots) in it. I would be offended and so would my family if someone called our hair nappy just because it is in it's natural form and is not straightened. We work hard to maintain it, it requires a lot of work and products that some places don't provide (at least at a reasonable cost for-sure). Just think of it as though you had that hair, wouldn't be painful and difficult to manage, give them some props.
I learns something new everyday. In my country "krusete" is the word for "nappy" in my language and is used about everyone with even more curly hair than other curly hair textures. It gets used about everyone regardless if they're European, African or whatever if they've very curly hair.
Ohh, I see, thanks, well I learned something new today as well, language it can be misleading at times. But yes I am sure many countries abroad will appreciate the change in word choice when discussing their hair. I was unaware of this and I will be more understanding if this term is addressed to me now. Thought it had only one interpretation. Especially in America avoid the word nappy though, others could take offense as well.
Yeah, that is the first definition that pops up when the term is googled online. I would post a screenshot of the Google page with the definition but I don't know how to paste it here. I just searched on Google "define nappy" and that is the first one and the origin reads "British".
I'm native now, Aboriginal people rarely ever question what I say, when I tell them who I am, where I came from they generally look at me knowing all they need to know. As a child I grew up partly in a home with two Aboriginal kids. Unfortunately I was not around to defend Aboriginal people when all these things happened. The statement "you got buckleys" is an old reference to William Buckley, he escaped the colony and lived with Aboriginal people for more than 30 years. If you read about him you will find out why these people loved him. And he loved them back. So to answer your question did everyone treat aborigines bad, no they did not.
I love how environmental and adaptation effect physical attributes of the human species. I wouldn’t say the Australian Aboriginal people are that dissimilar to early nz Māori the only difference would be the aboriginal people in Australia ( there own country by the way ) are less respected by the colonialists that occupy Australia and there has therefore been less watering down of there genetic makeup.
I think Australia is crazy behind in showing respect for the guardians of their land. In NZ the history and the culture of the Maori people is a huge source of pride, it is also our biggest tourist attraction.
Australian Aborigines are different because there are significant physical and intellectual differences between the races. In the case of the Aborigines, the differences are evolutionary adaptations to living in an environment in whic calories were scarce 7 which offered them a diet that was low in fats and carbohydrates. That is why a full-blood Aborigine (such as the man in the pix), who was living on “bush tucker”, would be so lean that they would resemble a concentration camp inmate. They do not have the DNA to put on a lot of muscle mass, because anyone in whom that gene may have been expressed would have starved to death.
Australian aborigines can be slim, chubby and fat like everyone else. If you googles them, you can see they comes in all shapes and sizes like everyone else.
I absolutely cannot say why they have such uniqueness. There probably needs to be much more genetic studies of aborigines. My ex-girlfriend was primarily focused on Africa and African-Americans.
I think the only striking thing we can kind of discern is that Africans are their distant ancestors. But no matter how dark or light skinned aborigines are. . . that does not factor in how much into how much genetic commonality they have with Africans. No matter who you test, they tend to have about the same.
And then there is this, they are not very genetically diverse themselves. But in that, they share much in common with all non-African groups. Sub-saharan Africans have the greatest amount of genetic diversity in the world.
If I come across more info, I will let you know. It is an interesting question.
Thanks. I think they looks very unique. Europeans, Asians, Middle-eastern and some African groups looks very different - but still shares many similarities. Aboriginals shares more uniqueness than the other groups in my opinion. But they've some similarities to some African groups.
Some random mutations occur among some people in certain societies (such as light hair and clear eyes), then those traits and genes spread through the next generations of that society. I think, this is the reason why there are some physical differences between ethnicities. For instance, although Germany and France are very very close to each other, an average French would be darker in pigmentation. Whereas, an average German would be slightly lighter and would have slightly more Oriental facial features when compared to an average French. Since Aboriginals had lived in an isolated location for a long time, they could not interbreed with different ethnicities. Therefore, their features are very unique as I guess.
I don't think it's just Australia. Descendants of very isolated groups of people tend to retain a lot of physical features. Besides genetics, I'm sure that the environment they live in and foods that they eat probably play a part, too.
It's most likely just because they separated off from the rest of the human race fairly early and then didn't mix with other races for a lot of generations leading to genetic divergence.
Australian Aboriginies diverged from other human sub-species earlier, and went down their own evolutionary path. There has been no-where near enough evolutionary change to make them a different species, but it does show up in features.
I love looking at people who have been isolated genetically. Like in remote parts of Asia. You can even tell with some Swedish people. In America, everyone is mixed to a degree, and you don’t see differences like that.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions