PDA

View Full Version : Sub-racial confusion about Maureen O'Hara!



Scáthach
Friday, May 30th, 2003, 12:40 PM
maureen o hara is classified as brunn right? but to me (and yes i openly admit im new to this) she looks like a possible keltic nordic-red hair,green eyes,long narrow face and nose,tall forehead etc -oh and she's Irish which must figure somehow? the only thing i can think of is that she appears to have a weak chin and of course all the cephalic type things that i dont know about.

so my real question is what seperates a brunn from a kelt,if maureen is a good example of a brunn? and who is a good example of a kelt? :confused:

i'll add some pictures of her :)

Scáthach
Friday, May 30th, 2003, 12:41 PM
...

Scáthach
Friday, May 30th, 2003, 12:43 PM
..

Scáthach
Friday, May 30th, 2003, 12:45 PM
all opinions welcomed btw

Scáthach
Friday, May 30th, 2003, 12:52 PM
last one

cosmocreator
Friday, May 30th, 2003, 09:10 PM
I agree, her facial structure looks more Keltic than Brunn.

Tore
Saturday, May 31st, 2003, 02:34 AM
maureen o hara is classified as brunn right? but to me (and yes i openly admit im new to this) she looks like a possible keltic nordic-red hair,green eyes,long narrow face and nose,tall forehead etc -oh and she's Irish which must figure somehow? the only thing i can think of is that she appears to have a weak chin and of course all the cephalic type things that i dont know about.

Well, firstly, the Brunn type, and other Upper Paleolithics, tend to be rufous, whereas Nordics tend to be Blonder.

Her face is long yes, but it somewhat broad, and by no means narrow.

Your right about the tall forehead, but the Keltic Nordic type is typically low vaulted due to the great recessiveness of the forehead. However, a tall forehead by be indicitive of a Nordid strain deriving from the Vikings.

Scáthach
Saturday, May 31st, 2003, 02:49 PM
look at the first picture,i think that she does have a narrow face :confused:

Azdaja
Saturday, May 31st, 2003, 04:58 PM
Her face is somewhat long, but not really narrow. Compare her to the pic of the girl in that "classify swedish girl" thread. You'll see the difference.

Scáthach
Saturday, May 31st, 2003, 08:15 PM
oops,yep youre both right.
still i wouldnt see her face as being very broad more that its simply not very narrow,if that makes sense :)

so would you agree that she is brunn then or has anyone any other suggestions?

Tore
Sunday, June 1st, 2003, 03:42 AM
so would you agree that she is brunn then or has anyone any other suggestions?

Predominately Brunn, yes.

Zimmer Mann
Sunday, June 1st, 2003, 03:53 AM
There is a large amount of sexual dimorphism in the Brunn people or a significant difference in size and ruggedness between the sexes. Brunn women needn't be rugged and broad featured to be categorized as Brunn. I think she does look brunn or mostly Brunn.

Scáthach
Sunday, June 1st, 2003, 07:41 PM
ok thank you all :)

De Ogle
Saturday, October 30th, 2004, 10:11 PM
I agree she looks Brunn to me as well, with the corresponding body type. Keltic body types seem to be more lithe and gracefully slender.