How India & China see each other

[no smoking]

The rest (and majority) of what you say is incongruous generalization by someone with a reprobate mind. Fortunately you do not represent the Chinese and also fortunately what you say is not what Indians think.

Well, are you suggesting that you can respresent Chinese public?

Also what glory has PRC stolen which ought to be with India. I fail to understand your point. What glorification parameters of PRC are you referring to and please list out the dates when that was achieved and why.

That is right because you are an Indian. Most of Chinese thinks that it was India stolen and still occupies the land which ought to be with China. So what glory has PRC done in 1962? You can tell me!

 

[angeldude13]

That's an interesting account. See that would never happen in East Asia because there they genuinely look up to white people and no other. For indians it's more complex than that. I would say the only people indians truly look up to are the Persians. This is because although they never ruled over us, their culture dominated us for several centuries. Persian was the official language in indian courts for a long time. Look at the sheer number of Persian loan words in hindi. Although iran's diminishing stature in the world and rising stature of india is eroding this.
Look at indian genetics. Most North Indians have about 30% west Asian DNA coming mostly from Persians while Iranians on average have 30% south Asian genes, which is the largest outside of the indian subcontinent. We have a complex relationship with the Persians.

Post no. 19 by banglorean is the most accurate statement.
It's all about money.People in Delhi are rich and money speaks for itself.
There was a time when people would brag about getting brands and all but now a days everybody wears brand.
I remember some kids even bragging about chocolates from abroad which there relatives has bought but now you can't brag because those chocolates will be easily found in any chocolate store in India.
I remember jumping up in joy after seeing and Mercedes on Delhi road but now MErcedes,BMW's,Audi's,land rovers etc are seen everywhere in Delhi.
So skin tone is just a BS.
It's all about your money power.The more money you have,the more you will spend on your body.
Money does make people arrogant and racist(in most of the cases).......
I mean nobody like a poor gori girl wearing a third grade tibatan market jean or skirt.
And I don't know why but most of the people in Delhi have this thing that goris are kind of whore or something.......

 

[Compersion]

Well, are you suggesting that you can respresent Chinese public?



That is right because you are an Indian. Most of Chinese thinks that it was India stolen and still occupies the land which ought to be with China. So what glory has PRC done in 1962? You can tell me!

How you would have the definition of "Chinese public". Also what is the definition of PRC. Who represents PRC public - is that you.

Also 1962 is not in the minds of Chinese and average Chinese. Ask a average Chinese to explain and describe 1962 war and most will not even know why India and PRC fought a war. In fact many in Taiwan and overseas Chinese might favor India more knowing of such. Most will describe current PRC animosity towards India due to political ideology and also need for supremacy in the region (the 1962 war can have such origins also). With the PRC ideology being updated every day that impediment is being diminished. The need for supremacy by PRC would also be over time and can be seen with its incapability of projecting and wanting to take leadership role on its own - in fact the overreach to India is astonishing especially with the Pakistan connection. That leaves the border dispute to be the only impediment which frankly why would India and PRC want to resolve that since it helps promote hatred for one another - right !!

But what you are saying is like using PRC 1950 war and also 1968 war and also 1979 war between PRC and its neighbors that occupies the unconditional feelings and sentiments towards the others. (* that is a lot of conflicts and wars). I was shock to read that PRC has even fought with North Korea in 1968. How are the relations between all of the adversaries during these wars now. I can refer to 1839 war and 1937 wars but that was before foundation of PRC but again for your sake we can also ask how is the relations between the adversaries now.

According to you therefore the Chinese must have hatred with many people and do not like to a lot of people. And the only ones that Chinese like and do not hate is Pakistan since they have not fought one another !! But that is debatable since the Pakis gave away land and also promised to be Anti-India to secure non-aggression by PRC. How long with the record hold ... especially with the Western PRC inflammation and tilt towards India !! And if one asks a average Chinese why do they like Pakis they would be shocked and in puzzlement. You know how a average Paki is viewed and that generalization is fair and responsible.

Do you realize that PRC leaders have made its people go through a lot of dissimilar sentiments and feelings towards others and even amongst one another. The question cannot be what does the PRC people feel but what PRC leadership want the PRC public to think today about someone else case in point the Malaysians.

The history of the Chinese is far more respecting to have such inhibitions but yet that is being allowed.

I repeat please tell everyone why Chinese hate Indians and would not like one another. You can use history as much as you want.

 

[no smoking]

How you would have the definition of "Chinese public". Also what is the definition of PRC. Who represents PRC public - is that you.

Are you suggesting that you represents Chinese public?
At least, I am a Chinese growing up in China. I speak Chinese, read Chinese newspaper/website and watch Chinese TV. What make you believe you know better than me on "Chinese public"?

Also 1962 is not in the minds of Chinese and average Chinese. Ask a average Chinese to explain and describe 1962 war and most will not even know why India and PRC fought a war.

Again, what make you think so? How many average Chinese did you ask?

In fact many in Taiwan and overseas Chinese might favor India more knowing of such. Most will describe current PRC animosity towards India due to political ideology and also need for supremacy in the region (the 1962 war can have such origins also). With the PRC ideology being updated every day that impediment is being diminished. The need for supremacy by PRC would also be over time and can be seen with its incapability of projecting and wanting to take leadership role on its own - in fact the overreach to India is astonishing especially with the Pakistan connection. That leaves the border dispute to be the only impediment which frankly why would India and PRC want to resolve that since it helps promote hatred for one another - right !!

Again, how many overseas Chinese and taiwanese did you ask? I can tell you that you are wrong.

But what you are saying is like using PRC 1950 war and also 1968 war and also 1979 war between PRC and its neighbors that occupies the unconditional feelings and sentiments towards the others. (* that is a lot of conflicts and wars). I was shock to read that PRC has even fought with North Korea in 1968. How are the relations between all of the adversaries during these wars now. I can refer to 1839 war and 1937 wars but that was before foundation of PRC but again for your sake we can also ask how is the relations between the adversaries now.

Oh, please, stop using your ignorance to amuse me.

According to you therefore the Chinese must have hatred with many people and do not like to a lot of people. And the only ones that Chinese like and do not hate is Pakistan since they have not fought one another !! But that is debatable since the Pakis gave away land and also promised to be Anti-India to secure non-aggression by PRC. How long with the record hold ... especially with the Western PRC inflammation and tilt towards India !! And if one asks a average Chinese why do they like Pakis they would be shocked and in puzzlement. You know how a average Paki is viewed and that generalization is fair and responsible.

Can you please at least tell me where did you get these fansy ideas?

Do you realize that PRC leaders have made its people go through a lot of dissimilar sentiments and feelings towards others and even amongst one another. The question cannot be what does the PRC people feel but what PRC leadership want the PRC public to think today about someone else case in point the Malaysians.

The history of the Chinese is far more respecting to have such inhibitions but yet that is being allowed.

I repeat please tell everyone why Chinese hate Indians and would not like one another. You can use history as much as you want.

Ok, after all these BS, can you please provide a source of support information that Chinese public or average overseas Chinese favors India over PRC on border issues, please.

 

[Compersion]

Are you suggesting that you represents Chinese public?
At least, I am a Chinese growing up in China. I speak Chinese, read Chinese newspaper/website and watch Chinese TV. What make you believe you know better than me on "Chinese public"?
.

You have already have answered for all by telling what you have read about India and Indians in PRC, in PRC newspaper - website and PRC TV.

Indians are over-opmistics, big mouth, lack of self-criticism, etc. What does that say about PRC. (But obviously it says more about you).

What are your views towards:

Russian
Vietnamese
British
Pakis
Tibetans
Xingijang people
North Koreans
South Koreans
Malaysians
Japanese
Philippines
America

Remember PRC has fought conflicts and wars between all of the above (except one - Pakis).

Tell everyone who does PRC people like (make it simple for you). Compare the deviation of PRC views towards India and all the above - is that reasonable (that is not directed at you but the more reasonable and average Chinese like post #37 that appreciate that message).

It is better you take positions and approach like your fellow colleague in post #37 for your own betterment. That poster has more knowledge and understanding it appears from you.

And do you represent PRC more compared to that person. Already that poster has a different viewpoint ... ignorance is bliss.

Are you saying that India relations with Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan and overseas Chinese is the same to PRC.

Does the .cn flag have different connotation here ... are you really from PRC and represent PRC.

 

[TrueSpirit1]

You are so wrong when you said Chinese are the most racist.
Come to Delhi and find out what racism is?
Let me tell you an eg. I took my nephew to the zoo few months back.
There were few foreigners taking photograph of baboons.
Someone in local language said look at them they look like baboons and whole crowd started laughing at them.
Goras were pissed because they knew everybody was laughing at them and they thought it was over when someone commented that there a$$ will be red like that of baboon and public started to laugh more loudly.
Someone shouted in English that those baboon were there long lost brothers in English and again crowd started laughing.
Goras have had enough and they left the zoo.
Believe me its nothjing . I've seen worse happening in Delhi.

That's there in entire North India.
In fact, much worse. Beyond verbal.

 

[Pratap]

That's there in entire North India.
In fact, much worse. Beyond verbal.

Wrong. The British and German( Europeans in general) not just preferred beauty of white skin but started killing people and discriminating against anyone who was not that white. The British also devised a theory that Spanish who are relatively darker and so were backward. All this became much problematic for them after 1950s when so called liberalism swept this land. The crimes committed in name of skin color was so horrific that whites became defensive and denialist regarding whole thing. They coined things like " black is beautiful" and that anyone preferring fair color is " racist".
The modern day Indians educated in west lapped up this nonsense so as a result calling a spade a spade became politically incorrect. In Up, Bihar and in entire world, people prefer beauty and hence fair color but idiots started calling it racist.

Wherever there is variation in skin color, people in all ages have preferred fair color and that just as index of beauty not discrimination. A brahmin like Prabhat Jha would be more respected by orthodox Hindus of MP rather than much fair skinned Sushil Shinde who is a Dalit. However same people would call Shinde as having better looks. People often mistake North Indian preference for beauty as racism.
This is universal. East Asians regard themselves more handsome than South East Asians, South East Asians regard themselves as much handsome than Africans.
I had a friend from Zimbabwe and he was of Shona ethnicity. The guy was not that dark and made fun of south sudanese and Nigerians.
Some South Indians make this complain of racism in north India but I have yet to see some tribal dark women as lead actress in south films. Instead they import fair skinned actresses from North like Kajal Agrawal or Kiran Rathore. Who is hypocrite here?
People have always regarded fair skin color as much desirable and that has nothing to do with Persian, Turk or White dominance in India. The only people who believe in black being beautiful are those who have swallowed pseudoliberal propaganda of US and western universities.
A normal man from Tamil Nadu who is not educated and has no western influence will certainly like fair skinned people rather than tribals of central India.

Fair skin has nothing to do with qualities of head and heart and everyone recognizes this.

 

[Pratap]

@angeldude

And I don't know why but most of the people in Delhi have this thing that goris are kind of whore or something.....

The word you used is too strong but there are reasons for this. Western women are certainly quite loose and promiscuous. Anyone who denies it is sleeping in his own dream.( Give me break with" we should not generalize" thing)

 

[PredictablyMalicious]

@angeldude



The word you used is too strong but there are reasons for this. Western women are certainly quite loose and promiscuous. Anyone who denies it is sleeping in his own dream.( Give me break with" we should not generalize" thing)

They are normal. It's Indian women who are prudes. India needs sexual revolution! it is the need of the hour!

 

[PredictablyMalicious]

That's there in entire North India.
In fact, much worse. Beyond verbal.

North Indian temperament is just like Arab or North African - in your face and aggressive. South Indian temperament is more like East Asian one

 

[PredictablyMalicious]

Wrong. The British and German( Europeans in general) not just preferred beauty of white skin but started killing people and discriminating against anyone who was not that white. The British also devised a theory that Spanish who are relatively darker and so were backward. All this became much problematic for them after 1950s when so called liberalism swept this land. The crimes committed in name of skin color was so horrific that whites became defensive and denialist regarding whole thing. They coined things like " black is beautiful" and that anyone preferring fair color is " racist".
The modern day Indians educated in west lapped up this nonsense so as a result calling a spade a spade became politically incorrect. In Up, Bihar and in entire world, people prefer beauty and hence fair color but idiots started calling it racist.

Wherever there is variation in skin color, people in all ages have preferred fair color and that just as index of beauty not discrimination. A brahmin like Prabhat Jha would be more respected by orthodox Hindus of MP rather than much fair skinned Sushil Shinde who is a Dalit. However same people would call Shinde as having better looks. People often mistake North Indian preference for beauty as racism.
This is universal. East Asians regard themselves more handsome than South East Asians, South East Asians regard themselves as much handsome than Africans.
I had a friend from Zimbabwe and he was of Shona ethnicity. The guy was not that dark and made fun of south sudanese and Nigerians.
Some South Indians make this complain of racism in north India but I have yet to see some tribal dark women as lead actress in south films. Instead they import fair skinned actresses from North like Kajal Agrawal or Kiran Rathore. Who is hypocrite here?
People have always regarded fair skin color as much desirable and that has nothing to do with Persian, Turk or White dominance in India. The only people who believe in black being beautiful are those who have swallowed pseudoliberal propaganda of US and western universities.
A normal man from Tamil Nadu who is not educated and has no western influence will certainly like fair skinned people rather than tribals of central India.

Fair skin has nothing to do with qualities of head and heart and everyone recognizes this.

White skin is prefered but that does not mean it is more attractive objectively. Aren't you conflating the two things? How can the mere skin colour change someone's attractiveness? I think only east asians and south east asians believe this. In NOrth India, dark women with good features are considered attractive. It's just that there is a tendency to associate good features with lighter skin because of racist sh1t that comes out of Bollywood, although now that is changing too.

 

[Pratap]

They are normal. It's Indian women who are prudes. India needs sexual revolution! it is the need of the hour!

If you are so frustrated, go to Goris for entertainment.

 

[Pratap]

White skin is prefered but that does not mean it is more attractive objectively. Aren't you conflating the two things? How can the mere skin colour change someone's attractiveness? I think only east asians and south east asians believe this. In NOrth India, dark women with good features are considered attractive. It's just that there is a tendency to associate good features with lighter skin because of racist sh1t that comes out of Bollywood, although now that is changing too.

All things remaining constant, people prefer light skin. A light colored Sri Devi was more preferred than her original dark avatar.
You are right. Khatri women are certainly more beautiful than ordinary Swedish or English girls. Similarly, they are certainly good looking than Ladakh or Manipur women.( ladakhi, swedish are all much fairer)

 

[Pratap]

Deleted double.

 

[PredictablyMalicious]

All things remaining constant, people prefer light skin. A light colored Sri Devi was more preferred than her original dark avatar.
You are right. Khatri women are certainly more beautiful than ordinary Swedish or English girls. Similarly, they are certainly good looking than Ladakh or Manipur women.( ladakhi, swedish are all much fairer)

Maybe you are right that all things constant, people prefer light skin but we don't have this luxury in real life. If you see an attractive person with good features, you are attracted to her and you do not have the luxury of getting another version of her but with lighter skin. It's the features that really count. We must stop associating lighter skin with better features, and for that INdians have to change the colourist crap that Bollywood spews out.

 

[Pratap]

Maybe you are right that all things constant, people prefer light skin but we don't have this luxury in real life. If you see an attractive person with good features, you are attracted to her and you do not have the luxury of getting another version of her but with lighter skin. It's the features that really count. We must stop associating lighter skin with better features, and for that INdians have to change the colourist crap that Bollywood spews out.

Features like thin lips, good eyes and sharp noses are what makes any person attractive regardless of color. But in India, these features are found predominantly in groups who are lighter hence the correlation. No one would like Michael Jackson even if he became white rather than Arjun Kapur.

 

[TrueSpirit1]

Wrong. The British and German( Europeans in general) not just preferred beauty of white skin but started killing people and discriminating against anyone who was not that white. The British also devised a theory that Spanish who are relatively darker and so were backward. All this became much problematic for them after 1950s when so called liberalism swept this land. The crimes committed in name of skin color was so horrific that whites became defensive and denialist regarding whole thing. They coined things like " black is beautiful" and that anyone preferring fair color is " racist".
The modern day Indians educated in west lapped up this nonsense so as a result calling a spade a spade became politically incorrect.

Agreed

In Up, Bihar and in entire world, people prefer beauty and hence fair color but idiots started calling it racist.

I would myself (like anybody else) prefer fair over dark.

But, if you believe, beauty = fair colour, you have not seen enough. Trust me. That's too wide a generalization to the extent of being grossly incongruous.

 

[TrueSpirit1]

@angeldude



The word you used is too strong but there are reasons for this. Western women are certainly quite loose and promiscuous. Anyone who denies it is sleeping in his own dream.( Give me break with" we should not generalize" thing)

Blacks are known to be most promiscuous. Much more than Hispanics or Mainland Whites.

 

[TrueSpirit1]

Features like thin lips, good eyes and sharp noses are what makes any person attractive regardless of color. But in India, these features are found predominantly in groups who are lighter hence the correlation.

That's a fact.

No one would like Michael Jackson even if he became white rather than Arjun Kapur.

I believe, you meant, Neil Nitin Mukesh. Mukesh ka pota & Nitin Mukesh ka launda.

 

[PredictablyMalicious]

Features like thin lips, good eyes and sharp noses are what makes any person attractive regardless of color. But in India, these features are found predominantly in groups who are lighter hence the correlation. No one would like Michael Jackson even if he became white rather than Arjun Kapur.

I disagree. To me, UP ites don't look that different from Punjabis though the latter have fairer skin on average. THe UPites mostly have the same features. Same with Rajasthanis, especially the Rajputs. I've seen a lot of dalit beggars in North India who look predominately caucasian with very little australoid mixture. They had attractive fixtures but dark skin. If you live in India, just look around. Like I said, Bollywood has distorted Indian conception of beauty and themselves.