Well, this was originally sent in the thread "Asians with Big Dicks", but it seems to be too long for it since there are more about pictures sharing. So I put it here, Try to rationly understand the whole problem.
I apologize for bringing up an old issue that is not much discussed anymore, the size of Asian tools, but there seem to be some factors that have been overlooked for a long time.
First, we need to define 'Asian' as it is generally used here, which usually includes China, Korea, Japan, and a number of Southeast Asian countries, and possibly Taiwan depending on political views.
Famine, malnutrition, and poor national economic development have been the most serious problems in these countries in the past five to six decades. This is more severe than the usual malnutrition or use of dairy products discussed. During the worst times, Chinese people even ate kaolin to fill their stomachs or tree bark, which of course had no nutrition and eventually killed them. This may be quite different from poverty as understood in most of the Western world. An exception in these countries worth mentioning is Thailand, Japan, and Taiwan. Although they were also affected by this malnutrition, it was not as severe compared to other countries. It is also worth noting that the malnutrition or deficiency discussed here is actually based on the intake of calories, proteins, micronutrients, etc., and is a comparison with the typical diet of the Caucasian world, where the most severe malnutrition and deficiency were in countries like China, which were sadly associated with Soviet communism.
As for how to understand this type of famine, whether it's the famine that once occurred in Ukraine or China, or actually in North Korea today, these are good typical examples. There may be degrees of difference, but the nature of their problems is similar, having abundant resources but serious food problems due to insufficient distribution by the bureaucratic system. Another perhaps more familiar example in the Western world, which some people may realize after reading a lot of material, is the famine caused in Germany by the blockade during World War I. Although different, some elderly people in rural Germany may still retain the practice of growing potatoes to prevent famine, as potatoes are a very easy plant to grow and are indeed very nutritious.
A typical Chinese diet, I'm talking about now, and I mean a normal diet that meets the minimum material needs of a family, is actually not complicated in terms of macronutrient calculation: 200 grams of rice or noodles for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, equivalent to about 50 grams of carbohydrates per meal, 150 grams of carbs per day, mainly rice or noodles, 200 grams of meat per day is considered a lot, actually providing 50 grams of protein, and then no more than 40 grams of oil. This totals 1160 calories. As a reference, a standard diet should actually be around 2400 calories per day, even over 3000 for a more varied diet. The calculation of macronutrients is simple: 4 calories per gram for proteins and carbohydrates, and 9 calories per gram for fats. If necessary, you can verify this by entering your daily intake into cronometer.
Another data point related to living standards is that, according to official data from China in 2020, there are 600 million people with a monthly income of less than 1000 RMB (about 150 USD), including 220 million people with a monthly income of less than 500 RMB (about 75 USD). In China, the number of people with a monthly income of less than 2000 RMB (about 300 USD) reached 964 million. It should also be remembered that China has been known to manipulate its data, so these figures are likely beautified.
People don't think that when nutrition is insufficient, even with good genetic endowment, a person can grow very big. This actually explains a lot, especially considering the Asians who are in their forties and fifties now but were in their twenties and thirties when the thread started (06-08), i.e., the mainstream Asians seen at that time. Due to malnutrition, it's normal for them to be smaller than the global average. It might be a foot difference compared to the current world average of 5.5 inches; 4.5, and I'm being very generous with 4.5, considering my experience living in the north and visiting public baths. I thought about 3 feet, but those old people had lived through the Cultural Revolution or the Great Famine in China, hadn't they? This somewhat matches people's past personal experiences (sadly, yes, those Asians seen early in the thread, especially those with six or seven inches, might have had slightly better diets and environments, and could have grown an inch or more). Nutrition's impact on size can be understood as a shift to the left of the entire bell curve of penis size; if the curve goes from small to large from left to right, the curve has shifted left, so it seems that earlier Asians had a smaller average, but there were also larger ones.
As examples of how nutrition can impact human body size, I can cite two more cases. Medieval Europeans' heights can be reasonably inferred from the sizes of the armors found today, which suggest that Europeans, especially during the Middle Ages, were not taller than Easterners. I don't remember the exact figures, but I believe the inferred average height was around 1.5 meters. However, this has now reversed. Similarly, Dutch people have undergone a noticeable change in height over nearly 200 years due to increased intake of dairy products and proteins, reaching an average height of nearly 1.85 meters today. The influence of nutrition on physical development is much greater than we think, but it takes much longer than we might expect for an event to unfold.
I'm not trying to say that the earlier statements about Asians having smaller average sizes but also larger penises exist is without problems. There's an unintended malice in these statements. Yes, they're based on personal experiences, but those experiences only apply to the previous generation, the Asians who are now in their forties and fifties. Asian countries have undergone significant changes in the past three to four decades. Their economies have made their own achievements, so nutrition and living standards have changed a lot, although still relatively poor compared to the rich dietary life of the Western or Caucasian world. Because this was their past experience, it seemed reasonable to them, and it's the reason they unconsciously concluded that Asians are smaller. But extending this conclusion to all Asians, regardless of their growth environment and, intentionally or unintentionally, tracing it back to race, is problematic. Their real point is that they don't believe Asians can be large; they should first prove why they don't believe.
For those truly curious about the size of Asian tools, it may take some time before they see more, as the millennial generation has just grown up. Starting from this generation, it's possible to change the stereotype that Asians tend to be smaller and eliminate any interracial differences. I've heard from many of my Asian friends (specifically Chinese) that there's a lot of discussion about why the new generation seems to be significantly larger on average than their generation. Well, this is anecdotal evidence and may not prove much. But the disappearance of such gaps is always good, especially when these size differences actually reflect a country's development and the quality of people’s daily lives.
Some have mentioned research reports indicating that these interracial differences do exist, but these conclusions are based on specific samples. As I said, the previous generation is indeed a bit smaller, simply due to malnutrition and a horrific living environment. So, whatever report you look at, as long as the sample is based on people born before the 2000s, the data is more likely to be smaller. Everyone lives in a specific environment, but many surveys fail to consider this factor. For example, some American surveys overlook the harm done to homosexuals by homophobes during the Stonewall movement of the seventies and eighties, comparing masculinity between homosexual and heterosexual men.
Another important issue is the sexual shame of Asians. Asian culture not only avoids discussing sex but also views it as kind of taboo, much like pedophilia is taboo in the West. So yes, no matter what natural gifts an Asian man has, he's unlikely to be as openly confident about his masculinity as Caucasians. They consider it barbaric, shameful, and primitive, lacking in education. Yes, I think it's wrong, but that's the mainstream in Asian culture. Perhaps when you talk to Asian friends, they might say that's a thing of the past, but their subconscious is still influenced by culture.
So, when addressing this issue, the best response might be to post their own photos directly, but usually, they are reluctant to do so. Maybe it's just around the average, so posting it won't prove anything, but even if they are that large, they might not be interested in doing so. The cultural factors surrounding this issue are not as simple as a choice like Muslims not liking pork, but rather a complex, perhaps not so scientific or rigorous, collective subconscious-like thing. Caucasians generally don't have this problem because they've never been ashamed of sex, and if they're exceptionally endowed, they'd proudly display it. Such behavior would only invite severe criticism and social ostracism in Asian societies.
Regarding the issue of photos, there's another point worth discussing. I wonder if anyone has overlooked the elephant in the room: the full erection in Asians and Caucasians is different. Firstly, most Asians are growers, and the difference between their flaccid and erect conditions can be very impressive. On average, this change is more noticeable than in Caucasian growers. Secondly, possibly due to the aforementioned sexual shame or other subtle cultural reasons, many photos shown by Asians are only semi-erect (50%). A simple way to tell is that Asians are hard and upward when fully erect; when an Asian is about 75% erect, it no longer feels soft,
but many of the photos actually posted about Chinese are of commercial male models from China, and these commercial models' photos are mostly soft, maybe 50%, but definitely not over 75%. Therefore, many people might mistakenly think that these images represent their fully erect condition.
Additionally, there's another aspect that might venture into politically incorrect territory but is factual. Asian countries, especially East Asia (which often refers to China, Japan, and Korea, all parts of the Confucian cultural sphere), are very resistant to masculine traits. The Masculinity I mentioned demands bravery, self-expression, fighting for honor, etc., but in collectivist Asian countries, this is often seen as the biggest threat by rulers. So, even though every founding emperor or king was full of masculinity, knowing how they had rebelled, they also blocked the path they had taken, leading to a tendency towards demasculinization in Asian culture.
But we can understand this issue more simply. One might wonder how China could have such a vast territory with pre-information age technology. Rulers would go to great lengths to maintain their rule, plotting against their people and ruthlessly killing anyone who might try to rebel. This parallels our understanding of authoritarian regimes. A culture has long been formed: do not resist, conform, and abandon masculinity. Japan is an exception due to its samurai class, which changed Japanese society through coup d'états, so the perception of Japanese people is not as demasculinized.
I must point out that the masculinity I'm referring to is not about being alpha or sigma males but about being resilient, strong, willing to resist and speak up for oneself, like a warrior, and not "toxic masculinity."
Regarding the tendency towards demasculinization, it only applies internally within Asian countries when it comes to stability and security (preventing rebellion, etc.). In people's daily lives, it's not the case. Asian policies and cultural habits often say one thing officially but mean another in reality. The trend towards demasculinization is official, but in real life, people don't act that way. Male stars on TV may be increasingly feminized, but this inner aesthetic preference always remains a small minority in the population. A better explanation for this phenomenon is that investing in and operating male stars with a relatively feminine appearance, like those in Korea, is much cheaper and simpler than those with a rugged style.
About the genetic factors controlling size, it's indeed complex, but not as complex as imagined. 99% of the human genome consists of regulatory factors (auxiliary genomic elements), and 1% are actual genes (controlling enzymes or proteins). Especially with epigenetics now so hot, everyone should realize that their lifestyle, whether or not they get sunlight, what they eat, etc., all have profound effects on their gene expression. And yes, these effects can be passed down for many generations, although they can also be reversed within a generation. However, Asians live under a lot of stress. They go to school from primary to high school from 7 am(get up at 6 am) spending almost all day in classrooms or limited activity spaces until 5-6 pm(middle school) or even 10 pm(high school). They not only lack sunlight and physical exercise (teachers always say the PE teacher is sick), but their classroom lights are primitive, without blue light filtering LEDs. Their homework even forces them to work until 3-4 in the morning(Yes, and they get up at 5 or 6). Many might think I'm making this up, but this is the reality in China, where I've lived for many years. I think I don't need to add too much detail on how hard this life is, as these points are enough. As for whether these poor lifestyle habits can have such a deep impact even over such a long period, men can search for articles on how to increase testosterone to find out.
Imagine being a teenager growing up in such a sexually repressive environment, going to school every day not only without any pleasure but also destroying your sleep. Without space and time for independent thought, without sunlight, without exercise, repeatedly doing useless exercises only for scores. Even with the best genetic endowment, how much can it be utilized? If the earlier famines are too far removed from today's Asians, these hard lives are not. Everyone knows Asians are very diligent, but few think about how painful this diligence is. By the way, don't forget that most East Asians are still in a condition of calorie deficiency, even during adolescence, a time when the body needs to grow and be nourished. Even now, we can derive a very bad new stereotype: Japanese don't eat, Koreans don't sleep, Chinese don't rest. This may be strange for the West, but familiar with East Asians.
I think I should add that the earlier discussion of nutritional famine and poor conditions doesn't quite apply to Japan, which has developed well compared to its less fortunate Asian neighbors. But Japan has always had a culture of eating less due to being an island nation with relatively scarce resources. It's easy to find videos online of Japanese girls eating tiny cakes the size of their palms and pretending to be full. Regarding Japan, isn't it known that for a long time, and I don't know if it's still the case, Japanese AV deliberately chose men with smaller or average-sized penises for filming? The purpose of such filming is to give the majority of men who have average size confidence. And can someone really use the porn industry, which has always been racially discriminatory and pandering to stereotypes, to validate their racially biased beliefs?
My reply aims to express my understanding of this issue and offer thoughts that might help others who are similarly puzzled. We shouldn't deceive ourselves; in the past, we've seen both small and large, and we shouldn't deceive ourselves that all this is changing. Sometimes, to arrive at a comprehensive, neutral, and objective statement, one must invest a lot of effort and thought, not just pretend to be neutral.
Eating little or poorly, or having a terrible lifestyle, enormous pressure, that's why we have Asian stereotypes, and why it's so hard to objectively and soberly get rid of them logically, not just politically correctly.
So my personal conclusion is that there are no interracial differences. If you insist there are, yes, maybe one day we need to seriously discuss a difference of 0.1 inches, although it can be significantly exceeded daily, like trying to get harder or when it's a bit colder. There are no genetic endowment differences, but there are indeed cultural, dietary, and lifestyle differences. The latter is more complex than discussed here, but malnutrition is indeed too crucial; no matter how fine and varied the diet, insufficient quantity is not enough. (introduce a website: calcSD - About)
Many of my views are indeed based on my life experiences in China and discussions with Chinese friends. But given that when we talk about East Asia, we often actually mean China, I think my conclusions, while limited, are worth considering for everyone.
I apologize for this lengthy response about an old issue. It might have interrupted some people's mood for viewing pictures, but I think it's necessary to say these things, not for political correctness, but to clarify things.
I apologize for bringing up an old issue that is not much discussed anymore, the size of Asian tools, but there seem to be some factors that have been overlooked for a long time.
First, we need to define 'Asian' as it is generally used here, which usually includes China, Korea, Japan, and a number of Southeast Asian countries, and possibly Taiwan depending on political views.
Famine, malnutrition, and poor national economic development have been the most serious problems in these countries in the past five to six decades. This is more severe than the usual malnutrition or use of dairy products discussed. During the worst times, Chinese people even ate kaolin to fill their stomachs or tree bark, which of course had no nutrition and eventually killed them. This may be quite different from poverty as understood in most of the Western world. An exception in these countries worth mentioning is Thailand, Japan, and Taiwan. Although they were also affected by this malnutrition, it was not as severe compared to other countries. It is also worth noting that the malnutrition or deficiency discussed here is actually based on the intake of calories, proteins, micronutrients, etc., and is a comparison with the typical diet of the Caucasian world, where the most severe malnutrition and deficiency were in countries like China, which were sadly associated with Soviet communism.
As for how to understand this type of famine, whether it's the famine that once occurred in Ukraine or China, or actually in North Korea today, these are good typical examples. There may be degrees of difference, but the nature of their problems is similar, having abundant resources but serious food problems due to insufficient distribution by the bureaucratic system. Another perhaps more familiar example in the Western world, which some people may realize after reading a lot of material, is the famine caused in Germany by the blockade during World War I. Although different, some elderly people in rural Germany may still retain the practice of growing potatoes to prevent famine, as potatoes are a very easy plant to grow and are indeed very nutritious.
A typical Chinese diet, I'm talking about now, and I mean a normal diet that meets the minimum material needs of a family, is actually not complicated in terms of macronutrient calculation: 200 grams of rice or noodles for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, equivalent to about 50 grams of carbohydrates per meal, 150 grams of carbs per day, mainly rice or noodles, 200 grams of meat per day is considered a lot, actually providing 50 grams of protein, and then no more than 40 grams of oil. This totals 1160 calories. As a reference, a standard diet should actually be around 2400 calories per day, even over 3000 for a more varied diet. The calculation of macronutrients is simple: 4 calories per gram for proteins and carbohydrates, and 9 calories per gram for fats. If necessary, you can verify this by entering your daily intake into cronometer.
Another data point related to living standards is that, according to official data from China in 2020, there are 600 million people with a monthly income of less than 1000 RMB (about 150 USD), including 220 million people with a monthly income of less than 500 RMB (about 75 USD). In China, the number of people with a monthly income of less than 2000 RMB (about 300 USD) reached 964 million. It should also be remembered that China has been known to manipulate its data, so these figures are likely beautified.
People don't think that when nutrition is insufficient, even with good genetic endowment, a person can grow very big. This actually explains a lot, especially considering the Asians who are in their forties and fifties now but were in their twenties and thirties when the thread started (06-08), i.e., the mainstream Asians seen at that time. Due to malnutrition, it's normal for them to be smaller than the global average. It might be a foot difference compared to the current world average of 5.5 inches; 4.5, and I'm being very generous with 4.5, considering my experience living in the north and visiting public baths. I thought about 3 feet, but those old people had lived through the Cultural Revolution or the Great Famine in China, hadn't they? This somewhat matches people's past personal experiences (sadly, yes, those Asians seen early in the thread, especially those with six or seven inches, might have had slightly better diets and environments, and could have grown an inch or more). Nutrition's impact on size can be understood as a shift to the left of the entire bell curve of penis size; if the curve goes from small to large from left to right, the curve has shifted left, so it seems that earlier Asians had a smaller average, but there were also larger ones.
As examples of how nutrition can impact human body size, I can cite two more cases. Medieval Europeans' heights can be reasonably inferred from the sizes of the armors found today, which suggest that Europeans, especially during the Middle Ages, were not taller than Easterners. I don't remember the exact figures, but I believe the inferred average height was around 1.5 meters. However, this has now reversed. Similarly, Dutch people have undergone a noticeable change in height over nearly 200 years due to increased intake of dairy products and proteins, reaching an average height of nearly 1.85 meters today. The influence of nutrition on physical development is much greater than we think, but it takes much longer than we might expect for an event to unfold.
I'm not trying to say that the earlier statements about Asians having smaller average sizes but also larger penises exist is without problems. There's an unintended malice in these statements. Yes, they're based on personal experiences, but those experiences only apply to the previous generation, the Asians who are now in their forties and fifties. Asian countries have undergone significant changes in the past three to four decades. Their economies have made their own achievements, so nutrition and living standards have changed a lot, although still relatively poor compared to the rich dietary life of the Western or Caucasian world. Because this was their past experience, it seemed reasonable to them, and it's the reason they unconsciously concluded that Asians are smaller. But extending this conclusion to all Asians, regardless of their growth environment and, intentionally or unintentionally, tracing it back to race, is problematic. Their real point is that they don't believe Asians can be large; they should first prove why they don't believe.
For those truly curious about the size of Asian tools, it may take some time before they see more, as the millennial generation has just grown up. Starting from this generation, it's possible to change the stereotype that Asians tend to be smaller and eliminate any interracial differences. I've heard from many of my Asian friends (specifically Chinese) that there's a lot of discussion about why the new generation seems to be significantly larger on average than their generation. Well, this is anecdotal evidence and may not prove much. But the disappearance of such gaps is always good, especially when these size differences actually reflect a country's development and the quality of people’s daily lives.
Some have mentioned research reports indicating that these interracial differences do exist, but these conclusions are based on specific samples. As I said, the previous generation is indeed a bit smaller, simply due to malnutrition and a horrific living environment. So, whatever report you look at, as long as the sample is based on people born before the 2000s, the data is more likely to be smaller. Everyone lives in a specific environment, but many surveys fail to consider this factor. For example, some American surveys overlook the harm done to homosexuals by homophobes during the Stonewall movement of the seventies and eighties, comparing masculinity between homosexual and heterosexual men.
Another important issue is the sexual shame of Asians. Asian culture not only avoids discussing sex but also views it as kind of taboo, much like pedophilia is taboo in the West. So yes, no matter what natural gifts an Asian man has, he's unlikely to be as openly confident about his masculinity as Caucasians. They consider it barbaric, shameful, and primitive, lacking in education. Yes, I think it's wrong, but that's the mainstream in Asian culture. Perhaps when you talk to Asian friends, they might say that's a thing of the past, but their subconscious is still influenced by culture.
So, when addressing this issue, the best response might be to post their own photos directly, but usually, they are reluctant to do so. Maybe it's just around the average, so posting it won't prove anything, but even if they are that large, they might not be interested in doing so. The cultural factors surrounding this issue are not as simple as a choice like Muslims not liking pork, but rather a complex, perhaps not so scientific or rigorous, collective subconscious-like thing. Caucasians generally don't have this problem because they've never been ashamed of sex, and if they're exceptionally endowed, they'd proudly display it. Such behavior would only invite severe criticism and social ostracism in Asian societies.
Regarding the issue of photos, there's another point worth discussing. I wonder if anyone has overlooked the elephant in the room: the full erection in Asians and Caucasians is different. Firstly, most Asians are growers, and the difference between their flaccid and erect conditions can be very impressive. On average, this change is more noticeable than in Caucasian growers. Secondly, possibly due to the aforementioned sexual shame or other subtle cultural reasons, many photos shown by Asians are only semi-erect (50%). A simple way to tell is that Asians are hard and upward when fully erect; when an Asian is about 75% erect, it no longer feels soft,
but many of the photos actually posted about Chinese are of commercial male models from China, and these commercial models' photos are mostly soft, maybe 50%, but definitely not over 75%. Therefore, many people might mistakenly think that these images represent their fully erect condition.
Additionally, there's another aspect that might venture into politically incorrect territory but is factual. Asian countries, especially East Asia (which often refers to China, Japan, and Korea, all parts of the Confucian cultural sphere), are very resistant to masculine traits. The Masculinity I mentioned demands bravery, self-expression, fighting for honor, etc., but in collectivist Asian countries, this is often seen as the biggest threat by rulers. So, even though every founding emperor or king was full of masculinity, knowing how they had rebelled, they also blocked the path they had taken, leading to a tendency towards demasculinization in Asian culture.
But we can understand this issue more simply. One might wonder how China could have such a vast territory with pre-information age technology. Rulers would go to great lengths to maintain their rule, plotting against their people and ruthlessly killing anyone who might try to rebel. This parallels our understanding of authoritarian regimes. A culture has long been formed: do not resist, conform, and abandon masculinity. Japan is an exception due to its samurai class, which changed Japanese society through coup d'états, so the perception of Japanese people is not as demasculinized.
I must point out that the masculinity I'm referring to is not about being alpha or sigma males but about being resilient, strong, willing to resist and speak up for oneself, like a warrior, and not "toxic masculinity."
Regarding the tendency towards demasculinization, it only applies internally within Asian countries when it comes to stability and security (preventing rebellion, etc.). In people's daily lives, it's not the case. Asian policies and cultural habits often say one thing officially but mean another in reality. The trend towards demasculinization is official, but in real life, people don't act that way. Male stars on TV may be increasingly feminized, but this inner aesthetic preference always remains a small minority in the population. A better explanation for this phenomenon is that investing in and operating male stars with a relatively feminine appearance, like those in Korea, is much cheaper and simpler than those with a rugged style.
About the genetic factors controlling size, it's indeed complex, but not as complex as imagined. 99% of the human genome consists of regulatory factors (auxiliary genomic elements), and 1% are actual genes (controlling enzymes or proteins). Especially with epigenetics now so hot, everyone should realize that their lifestyle, whether or not they get sunlight, what they eat, etc., all have profound effects on their gene expression. And yes, these effects can be passed down for many generations, although they can also be reversed within a generation. However, Asians live under a lot of stress. They go to school from primary to high school from 7 am(get up at 6 am) spending almost all day in classrooms or limited activity spaces until 5-6 pm(middle school) or even 10 pm(high school). They not only lack sunlight and physical exercise (teachers always say the PE teacher is sick), but their classroom lights are primitive, without blue light filtering LEDs. Their homework even forces them to work until 3-4 in the morning(Yes, and they get up at 5 or 6). Many might think I'm making this up, but this is the reality in China, where I've lived for many years. I think I don't need to add too much detail on how hard this life is, as these points are enough. As for whether these poor lifestyle habits can have such a deep impact even over such a long period, men can search for articles on how to increase testosterone to find out.
Imagine being a teenager growing up in such a sexually repressive environment, going to school every day not only without any pleasure but also destroying your sleep. Without space and time for independent thought, without sunlight, without exercise, repeatedly doing useless exercises only for scores. Even with the best genetic endowment, how much can it be utilized? If the earlier famines are too far removed from today's Asians, these hard lives are not. Everyone knows Asians are very diligent, but few think about how painful this diligence is. By the way, don't forget that most East Asians are still in a condition of calorie deficiency, even during adolescence, a time when the body needs to grow and be nourished. Even now, we can derive a very bad new stereotype: Japanese don't eat, Koreans don't sleep, Chinese don't rest. This may be strange for the West, but familiar with East Asians.
I think I should add that the earlier discussion of nutritional famine and poor conditions doesn't quite apply to Japan, which has developed well compared to its less fortunate Asian neighbors. But Japan has always had a culture of eating less due to being an island nation with relatively scarce resources. It's easy to find videos online of Japanese girls eating tiny cakes the size of their palms and pretending to be full. Regarding Japan, isn't it known that for a long time, and I don't know if it's still the case, Japanese AV deliberately chose men with smaller or average-sized penises for filming? The purpose of such filming is to give the majority of men who have average size confidence. And can someone really use the porn industry, which has always been racially discriminatory and pandering to stereotypes, to validate their racially biased beliefs?
My reply aims to express my understanding of this issue and offer thoughts that might help others who are similarly puzzled. We shouldn't deceive ourselves; in the past, we've seen both small and large, and we shouldn't deceive ourselves that all this is changing. Sometimes, to arrive at a comprehensive, neutral, and objective statement, one must invest a lot of effort and thought, not just pretend to be neutral.
Eating little or poorly, or having a terrible lifestyle, enormous pressure, that's why we have Asian stereotypes, and why it's so hard to objectively and soberly get rid of them logically, not just politically correctly.
So my personal conclusion is that there are no interracial differences. If you insist there are, yes, maybe one day we need to seriously discuss a difference of 0.1 inches, although it can be significantly exceeded daily, like trying to get harder or when it's a bit colder. There are no genetic endowment differences, but there are indeed cultural, dietary, and lifestyle differences. The latter is more complex than discussed here, but malnutrition is indeed too crucial; no matter how fine and varied the diet, insufficient quantity is not enough. (introduce a website: calcSD - About)
Many of my views are indeed based on my life experiences in China and discussions with Chinese friends. But given that when we talk about East Asia, we often actually mean China, I think my conclusions, while limited, are worth considering for everyone.
I apologize for this lengthy response about an old issue. It might have interrupted some people's mood for viewing pictures, but I think it's necessary to say these things, not for political correctness, but to clarify things.
