Why can't men handle rejection well?

He looks like your average white American desu.

One thing I'll never understand: if women are so afraid of men, then why do they go home with them hours after meeting them to fuck? Wouldn't one night stands be the most dangerous thing a woman can do?

He looks Hispanic. But I think that's due to the lighting and how mugshots are typically poor in image quality.

Women like to fuck. And also, women have admitted to going home with guys for fear that rejecting him will cost them their safety.

>he looks hispanic
So average white American, yes?

These days? Probably. Sometime after the middle point of this decade, the FBI moved white Hispanics under "Caucasian" for their crime statistics.

Dating apps should be the most dangerous thing ever but I have only once met any girl from there who I felt as though was showing the least bit of precaution whatsoever (granted we met in an abandoned parking lot in the dead middle of the night)

I know it is two fold on my part as well but just in general nobody ever asks to
>Facetime/make sure you are who you say you are
>meet in a public place or meet in groups before going off somewhere alone
>any sort of ID to make sure you are who you say you are
>never had a girl check my house to see if I was the only one there when they entered
>can count on one hands the amount of times a girl requested I use a condom and only one time have I met a girl who wanted for us to both get tested
I think everyone just relies on the fact if you did kill someone you met on the app/at the club I am pretty sure the police could find you pretty fast due to that electronic trail. That should not be the sole insurance policy though

>you do NOT deny Chad

>Women like to fuck
So why not fuck guys they know instead of total strangers?
>women have admitted to going home with guys for fear that rejecting him will cost them their safety.
>This stranger scares me so the proper course of action would be to get in a car with him and let him drive me to his house, where I'll get naked and have sex with him
Makes perfect sense, Jessica.

You know that some hispanics are objectively caucasian, right? Same with all arabs.

Not at all. Caucasian refers specifically to European descent; theoretically the Caucasus regions. And even that criteria isn't completely accurate.

>Same with all Arabs.
Arabs are Semitic.

user go to therapy

>Caucasian refers specifically to European descent
No it doesn't. It literally never has in anthropology. From the 1700s to now, it has never referred exclusively to those of European ancestry, and has always referred to skull and skeleton shape. The 3 major races, caucasoid, negroid, and mongoloid all refer to skeleton phenotype. Arabs, and even a good deal of hindus, belong to the Caucasian skeletal phenotype.
>arabs are semitic
And caucasian. What you're saying is like saying "norwegians are germanic, not caucasian"
One grouping contains the other groupings. Semitic, Mediterranean, germanic, are all subgroups of the Caucasian race.

Attached: Mankind1ma6.jpg (1160x951, 176K)

>Caucasian refers specifically to European descent
>t. brainlet

>fear for their safety
>better leave this public place with plenty of people who can help and go somewhere secluded with him to do something I don't want to do
Any woman who does that needs to be wearing a bicycle helmet outside for the rest of their life.

She was probably dating him beforehand, so all I have to say is:
>dating older men and wondering why they're not quality partners

Attached: 1566247720462.jpg (1600x1066, 313K)

Why was a 19 year old dating a 34 year old? Why do women choose the absolute worst the male gender has to offer? I seriously doubt this was the first indication he was an absolute POS

Does anyone else find this whole situation kinda funny? I'm just picturing this guy down on one knee with a big smile on his face showing a girl and ring and saying "w-w-will you marry me?" Then the second she's like no he turns on a dime and goes "FUCK YOU I'LL KILL YOU BITCH" and starts stabbing furiously

Because killing is bad teehee =D
It's the estrogen

>way to hurt someone...get away with it

Join the military

I would have to if I were born several decades ago, the urge to hurt somebody out and alone by themselves would be too great. Now everybody has a camcorder/emergency box flashlight all in one in their pocket at all times it is impossible to commit violence to most extents without being held accountable and I could not rot away in prison forever

>The 3 major races, caucasoid, negroid, and mongoloid all refer to skeleton phenotype.
Those are outdated concepts that many scientists avoid nowadays. So are skeleton phenotypes.

>Arabs, and even a good deal of hindus, belong to the Caucasian skeletal phenotype.
Their "phenotypes" are more in line with Mongolic-type traits, not Caucasian or European.

>And caucasian.
Arabs have virtually nothing to do with Caucasians unless the individual specifically is mixed.

>What you're saying is like saying "norwegians are germanic, not caucasian"
Norwegians are Germanic.

>Semitic, Mediterranean, germanic, are all subgroups of the Caucasian race.
Those are three completely different categories. To imbue otherwise is just pure racism.

I was actually an 88m in the army but I don't mean inadvertently like right now I am fixated on just getting revenge on somebody but I know I am prime suspect #1 and with todays tech they could prove it in a heartbeat just by looking at where my cellphone pinged

Hispanics belong more to Amerindians than Caucasian. Arabs are also closer to Africans.

>standing on a woman's grave to virtue signal

Way to generalize, one guy in a million who gets rejected grabs an axe and starts murdering people. the other 999.999 didn't...

women will shove all responsibility and blame to anyone else but themselves at all times to justify their actions and dumb decisions. repeal the 19th women shouldn't have rights blah blah you get the point.

Hispanics can be Indians, Africans or Europeans. Would you consider Cameron Diaz an Amerindian?

>implying he isn't exponentially more attractive to women in general after having brutally murdered one

Don't kid yourself roastie, thuggery would disappear overnight if women stopped incentivising it by fucking these neanderthals at every opportunity they had.

On a macro scale, the only thing that the average male can realistically do to prevent these kinds of catastrophes is refrain from perpetuating them, you're way more partially culpable than any robot is

>Hispanics can be Indians, Africans or Europeans.
They can't by definition. They can be a mix of those, but they're no longer considered Hispanic at that point.

>Would you consider Cameron Diaz an Amerindian?
She's closer to Caribbean.

>Those are outdated concepts that many scientists avoid nowadays. So are skeleton phenotypes.
They literally still teach this in college anthropology, and they still fucking use it in forensics. There have been cases in the last few decades where police find a skull and bones in the wilderness, and send it to a forensic anthropologist to determine the race, sex, and age of a person, and they turn out to be correct. It's just that because of politics, scientists (both physical anthropologists and geneticists) are hesitant to use the term "race" or similars. It has too much baggage, and you take shit from both the right and the left, but the concepts themselves have never been truly rejected.
Also, caucasian is an anthropological term, so it can only be discussed in antrhopological terms. To dismiss all the scientific backing with "it's outdated", but to insist on a non anthropological meaning (european descent) is retarded
>Their "phenotypes" are more in line with Mongolic-type traits, not Caucasian or European.
Eye shape (not "squinty"), nose ridge shape (long and relatively narrow, not short and broad), jaw shape are all in line with caucasian, and off line with Mongoloid, as are the proportions.
>Arabs have virtually nothing to do with Caucasians unless the individual specifically is mixed.
Except they ARE caucasians.
>Norwegians are Germanic.
AND caucasian. Germanics are caucasian.
>Those are three completely different categories.
They are all sub-groupings of caucasian.
>To imbue otherwise is just pure racism.
>Hispanics belong more to Amerindians than Caucasian
"Hispanic" is a cultural sphere term, and has no actual connection to race. It's like claiming "brittannics" and "franks" are mongoloids because of British Hong Kong and French Indochina.

This. 19 year olds aren't teenagers. Unless this is part of a Jewish psyop to gradually raise the age of consent to 30.

This isn't rejection lol this is a horrible moron. How TF do you not know a girl is going to say no. Like is there no gauge for how well things are going

(Nine)teen
Teen
Yes, a 19 year old is a teenager

>They can't by definition. They can be a mix of those, but they're no longer considered Hispanic at that point
That's retarded. There are full blooded white, Indian or black people in Latin America. Selma Hayek is a fucking Arab.

>They literally still teach this in college anthropology, and they still fucking use it in forensics.
Anthropology is not a legit science.

>To dismiss all the scientific backing with "it's outdated"
Scientific backings go outdated all the time. And in fact, are supposed to go out-of-date and replaced with better, up-to-date data. In fact, the authenticity and legitimacy of science depends on that.

>Eye shape (not "squinty"), nose ridge shape (long and relatively narrow, not short and broad), jaw shape are all in line with caucasian
Those are neither Caucasian nor Caucasoid traits.

>Except they ARE caucasians.
They're not. They're more Asian and African than European.

>AND caucasian. Germanics are caucasian.
Fine, but Arabs and Hispanics are not Caucasian. And it's racist to assert otherwise.

oh so thats why they call them teens

Attached: keanu-woah-300x300.jpg (300x300, 19K)

what's the point of even using those outdated terms like caucasian. You said yourself anthropology is not a legit science, where's the scientific background to support such terms?

so will will anyone with eyes

>There are full blooded white, Indian or black people in Latin America.
Those who aren't native to Latin America, perhaps (ex.: from family outside of L. America), but they're not Hispanic by definition. By that logic, African Americans are white because they were born in the US.
>Selma Hayek is a fucking Arab.
She has too little Lebanese in her to be considered as such.

>what's the point of even using those outdated terms like caucasian.
Because that's the legit usage.

>where's the scientific background to support such terms?
We usually call them biology. But even biology is (weirdly) not always considered a science.

>dating older men and wondering why they're not quality partners
err? 19 year old men would be literally useless to her in all ways.

Women date older men for obvious reasons. Imagine what kind of loser would exist in the 19 to 22 bracket kek

Is this a 1/16th nigger?

Cameron Diaz's family is from Cuba and they were originally from Spain

The point is kinda moot unless we know how many marriage rejections don't end in murder vs ones like this that do end in murder. If it's like 900 bajillion to one it doesn't really seem fair to say men can't handle rejection or to claim that women are justified in being scared of any random man.

I'd actually be pretty interested just to know how many marriage proposals receive rejections in the space of a year, one would have to guess not many just due to the circumstances under which one occurs. Yet, if you included instances where the female accepts at first (because the man proposes in front of a crowd, let's say) and then later backs out (after she's gotten the man in private), maybe it's more common than we think.

Anyway, this just kinda highlights how humans are more attentive to spectacle than the dull broad trends of reality. The things that kill us most are things we take in stride, but the things that kill us rarely, those grab and hold our attention. Then we make sweeping rules and generalizations based on exceptions while ignoring the more common realities.

>They can't by definition.
Alright, you're retarded.
"Hispanic" refers to people belonging to the Spanish sphere of influence. That is all. It's like how Americans, Canadians and Australians belong to the English sphere of influence, and so speak English, and have much of their cultural identity based on English customs. That is literally it. It has absolutely no ties to race, if you're from a country in the Spanish sphere of influence, you're "hispanic". "Latino", is similar, but also includes Brazilians, since they were part of the Portuguese sphere, not the Spanish. All of these men are "Hispanic."
From left to right, top to down:
Diego Boneta, a Mexican actor.
Diego Forlan, an Uruguayan former soccer player.
Lionel Messi, an Argentine soccer player.
Santos Saul "Canelo" Alvarez Barragan, a Mexican professional Boxer.
Random Maya male.
Random Tarahumara male.
Some Dominican Republic Baseball player whose name I forgot.
Sammy Sossa, another Dominican Republic baseball player.
You might notice that the top row looks nothing like the bottom row, and the first two in the bottom row don't look like the latter two. Everyone in the top row is of pure or mostly European ancestry. Spanish, English, Irish, German, etc. Crossing the Atlantic does not magically overwrite your genes or change history to change your ancestry.
The first two of the second row, are pure native American, Maya and Tarahumara, respectively. The latter two are a mix of Spanish and French, from the colonizers, Sub-Saharan African, from slaves brought over from the French, and a bit of native.
People of mixed Euro and Native ancestry are "mestizo". Same as a Euro-Mongoloid Asian mix would be called a "Hapa", or a Euro-Black mix would be a "mulatto". Mestizos are often hispanic, and hispanics are often mestizo, but not all hispanics are mestizo, and not all mestizos are hispanic either. The terms refer to different things.

It would probably help if I actually included my collage. All Hispanic men, of different races and ancestries.

Attached: Hispanic men.jpg (3052x1821, 1.72M)

Hispanic is a shitty term. Some ''Hispanic'' people can be full blown white while others are little brown goblins

Cool, here's a british woman.

Attached: muzzie-678x381.jpg (678x381, 41K)

>"TEENAGE" capitalized
You know what agenda you're pushing.

Except Hispanic *is* a racial term that denotes predominantly Amerindian descent, particularly on the Southern continent. There are non-Hispanics living there, obviously. But because of their ethnicity, they don't qualify as Hispanic, or even ethnically Latino. "South Americans" would be a more proper term, since it's more continental and (potentially) cultural. But definitely not racial or ethnic, like "Hispanic" refers to.

Only the bottom pictures are real Hispanics (and even then -- only half of them truly count).

the real question is what part of the world is he from

ok this guy is 200% based

>Anyway, this just kinda highlights how humans are more attentive to spectacle than the dull broad trends of reality

The reality is that men are in far more danger of being attacked and killed by random men than a woman.

You're an edgy faggot. I could beat the fuck out of you.

Bruh nigga, just don't be a fucking weirdo. Bruh, no wonder you're a virgin.

I am 6 ft 4, who are you hurting?

>Anthropology is not a legit science.
It is. It's not an exact science, but none of the zoological sciences are, because they're an attempt to put order and neat categories on nature, which is chaotic and ever changing. For example, where do dogs end? Chihuahuas cannot breed with Great danes, and they are MASSIVELY different in phenotype in all regards. But both are still considered "dogs", because there is no line we can draw to separate the two that isn't arbitrary. Despite this, everyone with a brain can immediately tell that great danes and chihuahuas are different. It's often compared to a color spectrum where it's difficult to say exactly where green ends and yellow begins, but we still agree that green and yellow are different colors.
>Scientific backings go outdated all the time
Yeah, after reviewing all the evidence, and it all still points that arabs are closer to Europeans that Mongoloids, and like I said, Caucasian is and always was an anthropological term. Your claim that Caucasian refers to those of European descent has literally no scientific backing, and the term is meaningless outside the anthropological context.
>They're more Asian and African than European.
Are you just going off Geography now? People move. Moving to another continent doesn't magically overwrite your ancestry and phenotype, you still keep your genetic heritage. The Arabs descent from caucasian, same as we Euros, we just split off a while ago, but not nearly as long ago as mongoloids or sub-saharan africans.
>Fine
What? You sound like you're begrudgingly accepting some sort of compromise, instead of accepting facts. We have the fossil record dude, we have literally thousands of skeletons that we have studies, and now we even have genetics.

>I am 6 ft 4, who are you hurting?
6'2 with a gun. Retard.

I am bigger with my gun?

Why was that woman not with her father or close male relative so he could protect her? Massallah

I can just shoot your head. You're not tough at all.

Look at dem lips. Those are nigger lips.

I can shoot your head with more ease given I do not have to raise my arms

>It's not an exact science
Science has to be exact in order to be a true science. Physics, neurology, chemistry, and applied engineering are exact. Non-exact sciences like anthropology, sociology, psychology, zoology, etc. are not sciences.

>and it all still points that arabs are closer to Europeans that Mongoloids
Which will be wrong and inaccurate due to not being an exact science.

>Caucasian is and always was an anthropological term
It's a biological term meaning predominantly European descent. Hispanics, i.e.: Amerindians and indigenous, are not that.

>Your claim that Caucasian refers to those of European descent has literally no scientific backing
It's called biology and geography.

>and the term is meaningless outside the anthropological context.
Which isn't science.

>Are you just going off Geography now?
Geography and evolution. Which are the main factors behind ethnography.

>Moving to another continent doesn't magically overwrite your ancestry and phenotype, you still keep your genetic heritage.
Your genetic heritage can be bred out and rendered moot after a period of time.

>The Arabs descent from caucasian
They're not. Unless you're part of the neo-anthropology movements that think Out of Africa is an invalid theory. In that case, you're better suited for .

>You sound like you're begrudgingly accepting some sort of compromise, instead of accepting facts.
Accept you're presenting falsehoods based on simple racism. Not facts.

>We have the fossil record dude, we have literally thousands of skeletons that we have studies, and now we even have genetics.
Which are clearly misconstrued, as usual for you alt-rights.

You haven't even done anything.

By legal nationality, yes she is. Or she might be, I don't what her paper say. But that's exactly the point. "Hispanic" people belong to what was once part of the Spanish Empire, and so were culturally and legally hispanic. Doesn't mean anything about their race though, same as that woman is still an arab, but is also a bong.
>Except Hispanic *is* a racial term
No, it isn't. Retards using the terms wrong doesn't change anything. It's like when the English busted some arab sex trafficking ring and the headline read "Asian gang rapes over 1,400 girls" or something and all the Americans were all confused because they thought "Asian" meant flat faced, squinty eyed, broad nosed yellow dudes, instead of just anyone from the continent of Asia. You're doing the exact same thing, mistaking one term for another. Just as "Asian" is a geographic term, and "Mongoloid" is the racial term, "Hispanic" is a cultural sphere term, and "mestizo" is the actual racial term for the average guy. You prove this yourself when you say
>(and even then -- only half of them truly count).
Presumably, you mean the first two, but the first two lads are of PURELY native ancestry, which are actually a minority in pretty much all of the Hispanic countries, overshadowed by "mestizos", who have MIXED Euro-Native ancestry.
In short, you're retarded.

I don't even have to

Because he is lol. Just cope with the fact that you're savages that can't be trusted.

>too stupid to commit a murder
It's honestly not hard, leave your phone at home for one.

Tell me about all the murders you committed

checked. your patience is very admirable my good man

>Doesn't mean anything about their race though
Except Hispanic is a racial and ethnic term, not a cultural or national one.

>same as that woman is still an arab, but is also a bong.
Ethnically an Arab, nationally a Englishwoman. But those are two different things.

>Retards using the terms wrong doesn't change anything.
Their usage of the term would have to be wrong in the first place.

>It's like when the English busted some arab sex trafficking ring and the headline read "Asian gang rapes over 1,400 girls" or something and all the Americans were all confused because they thought "Asian" meant flat faced, squinty eyed, broad nosed yellow dudes, instead of just anyone from the continent of Asia. You're doing the exact same thing, mistaking one term for another. Just as "Asian" is a geographic term, and "Mongoloid" is the racial term, "Hispanic" is a cultural sphere term, and "mestizo" is the actual racial term for the average guy. You prove this yourself when you say
Irrelevant tangent that's virtually a non-sequitur.

>but the first two lads are of PURELY native ancestry
Which is what Hispanics/Amerindians are predominantly are: native. A far cry from the Caucasians of North America.

etymologyfag here, words are defined solely by their usage. if you have a lot of people using a certain way, even if they're retarded, and even if it's opposite of its previous meaning, then that's now the meaning of the world.

He's not a white male. Doesn't look whimpy enough.

now that you mentioned it, that shit's HILARIOUS! God, how great would it be to have it recorded.. watch a dumbshit blind another dumbshit, shit's so cash.

>Science has to be exact in order to be a true science
You don't know what you're talking about, as evidenced by your inclusion of Neuroscience, which is also a biological science, and suffers from the exact same problems all other biological sciences suffer. Geology and meteorology also suffer from similar problems too, but they're a science nonetheless, and it's retarded to say otherwise. Those problems are that they seek to make sense of an inherently chaotic world that is always changing, and has thousands if not millions of variables. Now we know they're sciences because we can understand the principles and mechanics that govern all those things, like we understand how cells work, we understand how natural selection and evolution work, we understand how plate tectonics work, we understand how weather systems like hurricanes and tornadoes form, we understand ocean currents, and air currents, but when you get down to the small details, there are simply too many variables to be able to 100% predict anything.
It's why we can't predict weather 100% accurately, or why you have claims like "X fault could go off any year now" and decades later nothing has happened because the margin of error was measured in the decades, or why even after hundreds of clinical tests and millions of dollars of research, depression drugs still do fuck all or even make things worse. You cannot account for every last piece of magma, you cannot account for some airplane's contrail reflecting some amount of light that changes the weather system just a tiny bit but results in clouds moving a few more kilometers than you expected, and you cannot account for that individual patient to have a slightly different internal chemistry from their diet, or the weather, or just some genetic thing to cause them to not process the compound the was it was supposed to. They're still sciences, they still all follow a set of mechanics, and we can still predict them within a margin of error.

>19 year old TEENAGE
why word it like this? it's reduddant as fuck, anyone who understands the word teenage knows that 19 is teenage, and even if you don't if you can at least sound out the word you're probably smart enough to put two and two together.
fucking retarded libtards trying to make it seem like anyone who doesn't want to date an old hag with 3 children and 20 cats is a psycopath who will beat you to death if you disobey them, on top of being a pedophile.

>Geology and meteorology also suffer from similar problems too, but they're a science nonetheless, and it's retarded to say otherwise. Those problems are that they seek to make sense of an inherently chaotic world that is always changing, and has thousands if not millions of variables. Now we know they're sciences because we can understand the principles and mechanics that govern all those things, like we understand how cells work, we understand how natural selection and evolution work, we understand how plate tectonics work, we understand how weather systems like hurricanes and tornadoes form, we understand ocean currents, and air currents, but when you get down to the small details, there are simply too many variables to be able to 100% predict anything.
>It's why we can't predict weather 100% accurately, or why you have claims like "X fault could go off any year now" and decades later nothing has happened because the margin of error was measured in the decades, or why even after hundreds of clinical tests and millions of dollars of research, depression drugs still do fuck all or even make things worse. You cannot account for every last piece of magma, you cannot account for some airplane's contrail reflecting some amount of light that changes the weather system just a tiny bit but results in clouds moving a few more kilometers than you expected, and you cannot account for that individual patient to have a slightly different internal chemistry from their diet, or the weather, or just some genetic thing to cause them to not process the compound the was it was supposed to.
Irrelevant tangent that has nothing to do with this thread.

>They're still sciences, they still all follow a set of mechanics, and we can still predict them within a margin of error.
Then they're not sciences. Sciences are exact. Not subjective like religion or art.

Men are basically bombarded from an early age with messaging telling us that we're only as valuable as the girls we manage to attract. Therefore, when a guy gets rejected by a female he sees it as an attack against his very worth as a human being. If you disagree then me one sympathetic character who never gets the girl. Even the stereotypical loser/nerd/underdog male protagonist always gets the girl at the end.

>edgy for wanting to hurt people
>threaten to hurt them
the only edgy faggot here is you

Take up boxing user.

Nice try FBI, oreg-ano.

Attached: 1525823327479.png (475x417, 513K)

>Which will be wrong and inaccurate due to not being an exact science.
Genetic testing literally says otherwise, and agrees with anthropology.
>It's a biological term meaning predominantly European descent
No it isn't, you're pulling this out of your ass and even the most basic of searches would prove you wrong. Literally every map and categorization of the Caucasian race ever made includes near easterners, and north Africans.
>It's called biology and geography.
As far as Biology goes, genetics have shown that arabs are closer to us than to Mongoloids. Natural selection doesn't care where you are, just how well you can cope with the environment and who your potential mates are.
>geography
So what? If I were to move to Japan I wouldn't be Caucasian anymore? Natural selection doesn't give a shit about where we humans draw our lines and say "this is Europe, this is Asia, this is Afriaca", it just cares if you can survive and if you can fuck. Caucasians developed in the caucasus, and then spread out from there both east into the Near East and the Indian subcontinent, and West, into Europe. Both groups are still caucasian, the ancestry is the same.
After that you just repeat yourself, because you don't understand that humans have migrated throughout the entire world and have done so for millennia.
>Accept you're presenting falsehoods based on simple racism
What exactly have I said that is racist? If anything, you're the one that is desperately trying to deny that we are related to arabs.

>Irrelevant tangent that has nothing to do with this thread.
Your choces at this point are:
A) Admit you lack the intelligence and education to understand what you're talking about
B) Admit you're just arguing in bad faith. I'd even take "lol trolled you XDDD".
You claimed anthropology is not a real science, and then claimed that any "real" science has to be exact, and then even included an inexact science because you don't actually know what you're talking about. I demonstrated that sciences relating to the natural world cannot, by their nature, be exact because of all the variables involved, but are still sciences because they are based on proven mechanics and principles, and accurately predict things within a margin of error.
>Then they're not sciences. Sciences are exact. Not subjective like religion or art.
So what? All those genomes we've mapped are fake and subjective? All those charts of weather currents and tests on flotsam are fake and subjective? The fact that meteorologists are still pretty accurate is just a coincidendence and subjective? All of our medicines and treatments don't actually work and people getting better is just a coincidence and subjective?
Come on, admit you're trolling, because I don't want you to have to admit you genuinely retarded.

this is just fucking pathetic.
and the dude deserves to have hir cock and balls eaten by pits.

anyways in my experience is women who can't handle rejection, my ex keeps fucking sending me pics of her and her new bf, just to show of how happy and in love she is.

imagine that, so in love with someone, while still having another dude living rent free in her head.

The guy has a pretty masculine facial structure it's funny we still act incel. Even "most" ugly ass dorks dont sperg out this bad.

I get told I look Mexican a lot. But I am still pretty pale and have brown hair, brown eyes. I live in cali. I'm actually mixed asian and white.

1/3
>Genetic testing literally says otherwise, and agrees with anthropology.
But that doesn't validate anthropology nor make it science. It simply correlates with them. And if anthropology is all these genetic tests go with, then that puts the authenticity and validity of the genetic tests into doubt.

>No it isn't, you're pulling this out of your ass and even the most basic of searches would prove you wrong.
Ad hominem, plus that information is wrong. Caucasian refers mainly to European descendancy. And it would be racist and disingenuous to non-Euros to suggest otherwise. That kind of buggery is more suited for Jow Forums or Stormfront.

>Literally every map and categorization of the Caucasian race ever made includes near easterners, and north Africans.
You're likely referring to Western Asian studies. Not European or Caucasian.

>As far as Biology goes, genetics have shown that arabs are closer to us than to Mongoloids.
Those genetic are wrong, then. Plus, "Mongoloid" is a racist and outdated term. "Mongolic" would be more suited, but even that's flimsy.

>Natural selection doesn't care where you are
Natural selection depends entirely on environment. But we're spiralling off-topic in Darwinism.

>If I were to move to Japan I wouldn't be Caucasian anymore?
Whatever kids you have with the local population, and the generations after, probably won't.

>Natural selection doesn't give a shit about where we humans draw our lines and say "this is Europe, this is Asia, this is Afriaca"
Complete misunderstanding of natural selection, which treats the geography as some magical land where locality is relegated to those regions, when really these are based off of observed averages, not determined by them. And as inferred previous, natural selection has nothing to do here.