First off, if the ONLY thing you describe on Asian characters is their eye shape and NEVER describe it for any other race, you have issues.

Equal opportunity to detail for all characters and all features with a mind for diversity within, as filtered through the POV character's perception filter. Keep saying that every time you reach for it.

1 full paragraph on a Black character's skin color and hair texture and then 1 full paragraph on the exact shape of the East Asian's eye shape and then 1 full paragraph on European eye color and hair color, and you really fucked up. Balance it out. Make sure you're capturing the diversity within. I'll beg you as an anthropologist to at least examine more than the stereotype and think about LIGHTING. Eyes, skin, hair, all change color in light, dammit, doesn't matter the genre. That's physics.

But looking online, I found there was a dearth of really good concentrated charts. Most of them are "Hey, plastic surgery." "Hey, want to enhance your natural beauty by changing your eye shape with make up and I'll shame you for having say, deep set eyes or a 'monolid'" And there was vocabulary used like "regular" and "normal" which makes me feel stabby since it defaults European beauty standards. And then a bunch of them were straight up racist. "The Asian eye" WTF is the Asian eye? JFCOAC, how many times do we have to explain that there are a shit ton of countries in the continent of Asia and even in East Asia there is no one singular eye type. And saying "Asian eye" to someone in the UK they think of someone Desi. I'd go through feeling stabby to depressed to dysmorphia so... to save a bunch of writers time and headaches, and because no one wrote a guide for us writers, I figured I'd come up with basic vocabulary to help.

I tried to stay neutral. Of course you can add judgment, but much like skin color, saying light/dark, naming cool/warm undertones and basic shade of brown (see wikipedia) I tried to keep it simple and let you embellish on your own.

As a young boy in school, Masaki Sashima would be dragged out of his classroom and beaten by his fellow students.

Masaki, now 72, was different to the other kids. 

He was Ainu, an Indigenous people from the country's northern regions, most notably the large island of Hokkaido.

"During recess, the hallway door would open, and several guys would yell at me to come out," he said.

"I clung to my desk in the classroom and kept quiet.

"Everyone would surround me and beat me."

Japan has long portrayed itself as culturally and ethnically homogenous, something that some have even argued is a key to its success as a nation.

More than 98 per cent of Japanese people are descendants of the Yamato people. 

But the Ainu are distinct, with their own history, languages, and culture.

Last week, the Trump administration quietly released a sweeping new federal rule that would use funding threats to force institutions across the country to reject transgender people. The 400-page proposed regulation would codify the administration's anti-trans executive orders into binding federal policy, imposing a blanket prohibition on federal funds going toward "gender ideology"

The proposed rule, formally titled "Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance," rewrites the government-wide framework governing all federal grants across every agency. Among its most consequential provisions, it requires that before a federal grant recipient can receive money, the award must pass a "pre-issuance review" conducted by a political appointee—not a career expert or peer reviewer—to ensure it is "consistent with applicable law, Federal agency priorities, and the national interest." The regulation explicitly instructs these appointees to screen for "denial by the recipient of the sex binary in humans or the notion that sex is a chosen or mutable characteristic." [...] An institution that acknowledges transgender people exist—through its policies, its training, its healthcare, its bathroom access, its HR procedures, its name-change processes—could be deemed to "deny the sex binary" or to “support the notion that sex is mutable” and have its federal funding blocked.

This torches everything. And I do mean everything.

A very abbreviated list of its ramifications include (but are not limited to):

ending funding for ALL DEI related initiatives

allowing the government to terminate grants at any point for any reason

preventing researchers from publishing, going to conferences, and being part of academic societies

requiring that topics must support the president’s agenda.

What this means, and if anything I’m under selling it, is the death of science and research in America. It allows the government to restrict any topic they please at a whims notice, putting officials who have no background in the topic in charge of deciding funding continuity. It controls what gets researched and if/how researchers are allowed to share their discoveries. There are no books to burn if the government never allows them to be written. This is fascism plain and simple.