- Status
I cannot believe this thread is still going. Wow.
Can we accept that attraction is initially physical & that’s natural? I don’t care for ugly people so guess what? I don’t fuck them. If some woman doesn’t want to fuck because she isn’t attracted to me I don’t get upset. Everyone is attracted to the look of the person they prefer.
Can we accept that attraction is initially physical & that’s natural? I don’t care for ugly people so guess what? I don’t fuck them. If some woman doesn’t want to fuck because she isn’t attracted to me I don’t get upset. Everyone is attracted to the look of the person they prefer.
Amen.
And not only is this silly thread still going on, there is now almost an identical thread that has been spawned here in the same forum:
Is White Preference Racist?
Is this all a form of racism and White-bashing?
hypolimnas
Superior Member
Well my interpretation is that this is a thing being discused in social media - so only natural to pop up here.
Racism is also a thing based in facts, research, politics and policy. We know young black men are more likely to have poor education, unemployment, and less likely to be in relationships (due to systemic incarceration). It is not racist to say this - it is based in fact.
The difficulty is when some people who have poor literacy and comprehension with a lot of time on their hands get a platform to vent their anger, aggression and sexual frustration then things aren't going to go well.
Because identity politics (simplistic and loud) is fashionable rather than basic civil rights for all (political understanding/history and some respect for difference required) some posters feel that on the basis of their own perceived identity they can (have the right to) behave poorly without consequences. Some posters literally know nothing of the subject they have appointed themselves to be the mouthpiece for.
For those genuinely interested in anti-racism, dating preferences are not relevant. While raising awareness of potentially racist attitudes is good there are many more important systemic problems to confront if one is serious about anti-racism.
Opinions are not facts. Venting won't change the world. The personal and the political, the public and the private, the rational and the subconcious plus the bodies we are randomly assigned create far more complexity.
Sexual attraction can not be reduced to a simplistic rule driven mindset - and has been the basis of all kinds of quite wonderful transgressive social behaviour in the evolution of our species.
The diversity of this site is still one of its attractions.
spaj8987
Legendary Member
@Llbaker You are. And it's in the most specifically broad way humanly possible.
It's like when people use the term identity politics and forget that white men have literally been guilty of that since slavery. All the way up until trump and the idea of making america great again/ wahhh wahhh i want things to be the way they used to be when i didn't actually have to work for stuffs.
Ok. Maybe not exactly like that.
It's funny though. There's a reason why there's no such thing as bwc. Why porn dismisses it entirely. Racist white men in the past who were jealous of black men's massive throbbing veined up juicy cocks thought that creating stereotypes surrounding it would push people away from people of color.
And all it did was make black men MORE desirable long term.
Sure, the stereotype has many faults but one of the good things about it is that racist white men are largerly racist BECAUSE they feel inferior. Having believed in the lies of previous white men they attack black men because they want what they were convinced black men have for thousands of years.
It's also no wonder why insane amounts of people couldn't pass the one drop rule. Cause even with those stereotypes having been created white women all through slavery got more than a tad of that bbc.
Racist white men are so triggered by previous white men's lies that they even think creating threads lying about what ALL black women want will trigger others. lol
You'd think given how much they pretend to want to protect white women from men of color that they would have figured out a long time ago that they can't. That there's nothing they can do about it.
And all of this from them having taken simplistic ideals..blown them up way out of proportion and then thousands of years later are still upset about it.
It's like punching yourself in the nuts and pointing a figure at others. lol
It's like when people use the term identity politics and forget that white men have literally been guilty of that since slavery. All the way up until trump and the idea of making america great again/ wahhh wahhh i want things to be the way they used to be when i didn't actually have to work for stuffs.
Ok. Maybe not exactly like that.
It's funny though. There's a reason why there's no such thing as bwc. Why porn dismisses it entirely. Racist white men in the past who were jealous of black men's massive throbbing veined up juicy cocks thought that creating stereotypes surrounding it would push people away from people of color.
And all it did was make black men MORE desirable long term.
Sure, the stereotype has many faults but one of the good things about it is that racist white men are largerly racist BECAUSE they feel inferior. Having believed in the lies of previous white men they attack black men because they want what they were convinced black men have for thousands of years.
It's also no wonder why insane amounts of people couldn't pass the one drop rule. Cause even with those stereotypes having been created white women all through slavery got more than a tad of that bbc.
Racist white men are so triggered by previous white men's lies that they even think creating threads lying about what ALL black women want will trigger others. lol
You'd think given how much they pretend to want to protect white women from men of color that they would have figured out a long time ago that they can't. That there's nothing they can do about it.
And all of this from them having taken simplistic ideals..blown them up way out of proportion and then thousands of years later are still upset about it.
It's like punching yourself in the nuts and pointing a figure at others. lol
that video is not an exposition. It is a proclamation.
A proclamation that if you follow your natural attractions, and they happen to not fall in line with the video makers if you points, or benefit them, then you need to do some self introspection. Almost as if something is wrong with you.
and if you choose not to, then you must be racist/sexist/homophobic/whatever... it’s a very divisive and manipulative video. And fortunately, it looks like roughly 95% of the people who watch that video can see through that, as the dislike to like ratio shows.
I have no idea why this assortment of partial truths, over-generalizations and stereotypes was aimed at me. And what does this statement of yours mean directed to me? "You are. And it's in the most specifically broad way humanly possible."
I don't accept racial, ethnic identity...or any of the other collectivisms if that is what you are saying. Yes, of course, white men have been deep into racial identity in the past, but, also, apparently less so now or at least more covertly..
I do see virtue in versatility.
but this isn’t a matter of seeing virtue in versatility.
it’s a matter of YOU seeing MORALS in sexuality. And there are none. What turns you on, turns you on, and there’s no right or wrong about it.
hypolimnas
Superior Member
I CAN! And as for ugly - I'm pretty accommodating. Great eyes, a smile, and the right attitude catch my attention. I love a great ass and cock with an average / fit body ... conventions of typical facial attractiveness are bit pointless once a face is buried in a pillow and fuckable ass is ready and willing.
this also reminds me of an excellent point.
Sex is about stimulus. Physical stimulus and emotional stimulus can be a huge part of it. But there is absolutely no denying that VISUAL stimulus can also play a huge role in sex.
And since visual stimulus can be such an important pillar (yes, even blind have amazing sex), i think it’s only fair, and natural to choose a partner who stimulates you visually. And if that happens to rules someone out, then so be it.
Why anyone would want to deprive someone a certain type of sexual stimulus is beyond me...
hypolimnas
Superior Member
Humans love certainty more than truth. Truth can not be reduced to absolutes ...
... https://www.amazon.com/Why-Black-Love-White-Women/dp/1416595422
hypolimnas
Superior Member
Sorry my previous reply was half-baked. I agree stimulus - attraction is an obvious part of dating. The reason that others want to bully the rest of us with their silly rules and judgements (which they notably never discuss as applying to themselves) - is basically because they are sad, lonely and angry. Nothing to do with you.
Why do they want to deny others pleasure:
Firstly because of identity politcs and their colonised minds, they can only see themselves as a skin colour not a human being first. Secondly when you actually see the people complaining it is obvious to me they need a hair cut, better hygiene, regular excercise and better ways to dress. Nothing to do with race.
Thirdly why do they think white men are the holy grail - basically rejecting their own race and a heap of others.
Fourthly they refuse to accept a basic understanding of what it means to be a minority and how being opinionated and angry makes them less attractive.
Fifthly probably being a black with a small penis makes them very angry (even with each other). People who are happy in their own bodies can easily adopt a live and let live policy as many of the beautiful black men here do. They aren't all small penis angry jerks.
Pretty sure I never used the word "morals" in this discussion. Generally, I would reserve that word for aggressions against individual rights, not achieving advanced fairness which overcoming "lookism" would entail.
spaj8987
Legendary Member
@Llbaker There are also more human beings now then there were during times of slavery in america. Many more. So when it comes to your comment of...
(Yes, of course, white men have been deep into racial identity in the past, but, also, apparently less so now or at least more covertly.)
I agree with you. Very much so. It could also mean as a sentence that there's seemingly less racism. On account of them having been forced into hiding their racism.
Like someone weeding and filtering out people of color on their dating profile.
The rest of what i said were examples of people making mountains out of molehills. Instead of viewing people individually and working on a logical view of other human beings. They superimpose stereotypes onto all people of color and weed/filter all people of color out across the board.
It was me showing examples of the logical outcome of not having to be serious when it comes to the language used in a topic.
The less seriously we treat and issue. The more we flippantly dismiss the topic as jealousy/envy, a card, automatically assigning that the person bringing up issues with being incorrect before we ever once apply serious thought or any thought to it and we get discussions that slant towards very specific directions.
It may not seem like it but the topic of racism is life and death. There's a reason why say..hitler...was able to kill so many innocent human beings before others even got up the nerve to stop him.
Language. It matters.
The second we forget or ignore the difference between tribalism and racism. That's the same second racism gains more ground.
The second we forget that racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia and penis size shaming all comes from the same place of insecurity. That's the same second we allow those who illogically believe in those things to gain support.
Take what you said for instance.
(You see no virtue in versatility?)
What would happen if we either didn't know what those words meant or didn't care? Wouldn't it render your sentence moot? And wouldn't that completely end the conversation? Or at the very least re-direct it towards other people's opinions?
Gaslighting.
If someone wanted to misstate what you said. Among a group of other people who didn't already understand it mean they could sway what you said to mean something you didn't mean it to say?
Virtue. [ conformity to a standard of right : morality ]
Versatility. [ Capable of doing many things competently. ]
Is it morally right to be a racist? No. It isn't. Does being a racist mean you are capable of doing many things completely? Of course not.
More in a bit. Gotta finish watching the video.
(Yes, of course, white men have been deep into racial identity in the past, but, also, apparently less so now or at least more covertly.)
I agree with you. Very much so. It could also mean as a sentence that there's seemingly less racism. On account of them having been forced into hiding their racism.
Like someone weeding and filtering out people of color on their dating profile.
The rest of what i said were examples of people making mountains out of molehills. Instead of viewing people individually and working on a logical view of other human beings. They superimpose stereotypes onto all people of color and weed/filter all people of color out across the board.
It was me showing examples of the logical outcome of not having to be serious when it comes to the language used in a topic.
The less seriously we treat and issue. The more we flippantly dismiss the topic as jealousy/envy, a card, automatically assigning that the person bringing up issues with being incorrect before we ever once apply serious thought or any thought to it and we get discussions that slant towards very specific directions.
It may not seem like it but the topic of racism is life and death. There's a reason why say..hitler...was able to kill so many innocent human beings before others even got up the nerve to stop him.
Language. It matters.
The second we forget or ignore the difference between tribalism and racism. That's the same second racism gains more ground.
The second we forget that racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia and penis size shaming all comes from the same place of insecurity. That's the same second we allow those who illogically believe in those things to gain support.
Take what you said for instance.
(You see no virtue in versatility?)
What would happen if we either didn't know what those words meant or didn't care? Wouldn't it render your sentence moot? And wouldn't that completely end the conversation? Or at the very least re-direct it towards other people's opinions?
Gaslighting.
If someone wanted to misstate what you said. Among a group of other people who didn't already understand it mean they could sway what you said to mean something you didn't mean it to say?
Virtue. [ conformity to a standard of right : morality ]
Versatility. [ Capable of doing many things competently. ]
Is it morally right to be a racist? No. It isn't. Does being a racist mean you are capable of doing many things completely? Of course not.
More in a bit. Gotta finish watching the video.
spaj8987
Legendary Member
@Llbaker
First off. The person in the video said dating preferences are...discriminatory. Not racist. Not sexist. Not homophobic. Not transphobic. So right off the bat we see @ArkNebradia having made a mountain out of a mole hill and attempted to paint large groups of people once more as having said something...they didn't actually say.
Based on his attempt and success at misstating other people's opinions we can see just how much language matters.
The difference between...difficult...and a handicap. And why the words we use to describe very important topics....matters.
Here's another issue. All discriminatory actually means is....
[ the act of making or perceiving a difference : the act of discriminating ]
..so right off the bat. It's not the worst thing in the world. People aren't going to die or be murdered if someone accuses them of being discriminatory or as having discriminated against someone else.
People discriminate against each other all the time. Though if you didn't know that. Or refused to acknowledge that. Then you could as @ArkNebradia and others have paint being accused of being discriminatory or someone saying you've discriminated against others as....being worse than nazis.
Something else they talked about is people's ability to effect their own prejudices. Which since i'm still getting over a slight cold sounded like pre juices.
Lets go over what you said once more.
(You see no virtue in versatility?)
Again. Is racism moral? What about sexism? What about homophobia? What about transphobia? Nope. Nope. Nope and nope.
There is nothing moral about those things. There is morality in checking your own prejudices though.
Again. Is racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia versatile? Of course it isn't. The people who believe in those things literally limit themselves. Which flies directly in the face of the word.
There is those versatility in checking your own prejudices. In doing that a person opens up possibilities.
So everything you said in that one sentence, if we were to understand what those words mean and understand just how diverse those words are, is fully in line with not only what the person in the video said.....but in many ways with the core values conservatives who are religious wish they had.
And now we've gotten to weight. Which very much could be moved directly over to penis size shaming.
The media DOES influence how we view others. Be it their weight or penis size.
So lets recap. I'm saying there's a difference between difficulty and handicap. I'm saying words are important. Language is important.
Now. Lets see what @ArkNebradia had to say about this video.
(And they pretty much flat out say if you wouldn’t date a trans person, you are transphobic.)
Did they once in that video say that anyone was transphobic? As far as i can tell, they did not.
(fortunately, given the comments they’ve received from this video in the past, it appears most of the world doesn’t agree.)
Is this true? Is the world against everything that person in the video said? What they actually said instead of what @ArkNebradia said they said? Of course not. Everyone wants to become a better person than they were yesterday. We may not all agree on how to do so but every last point made in the video is flat out shared across every christian in america. Difference is, they don't all apply what was said in the video to trans people.
The basic core of what was said in the video though...
(You see no virtue in versatility?)
..is.
(The uploaders goal was to push their agenda and make people more “woke” about the situation.)
How exactly does he know that? Oh because woke just means more informed. The person in the video made said video for the specific purpose of telling people what words mean. What some actions mean. And @ArkNebradia is clearly against all of that.
Why? Well, when you're making mountains out of mole hills. Those pointing to it being mole hills are a problem for you.
(All that video did was push people who support the LGBT community, but aren’t necessarily a part of it, further away from their cause. It turns potential allies into enemies.)
Watch the video again. Is that what happened? Or is it wishful thinking? Again, as far as i can tell all the person in video did was explain the meaning of words. Explain in detail parts of a topic. And did so in the most accepting way possible. Or..in the most versatile way possible.
(to be honest, you kind of do the same with your rhetoric.)
What is the meaning of the word rhetoric?
[ the art of speaking or writing effectively: such as]
[ the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times ]
[ the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion ]
So it would seem. @ArkNebradia thinks i'm bad because....i speak and write effectively? Because i study the principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times? Because i'm good at understanding the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion?
Translation: You know what words mean and how to good convey ideas so you bad!
More in a bit.
First off. The person in the video said dating preferences are...discriminatory. Not racist. Not sexist. Not homophobic. Not transphobic. So right off the bat we see @ArkNebradia having made a mountain out of a mole hill and attempted to paint large groups of people once more as having said something...they didn't actually say.
Based on his attempt and success at misstating other people's opinions we can see just how much language matters.
The difference between...difficult...and a handicap. And why the words we use to describe very important topics....matters.
Here's another issue. All discriminatory actually means is....
[ the act of making or perceiving a difference : the act of discriminating ]
..so right off the bat. It's not the worst thing in the world. People aren't going to die or be murdered if someone accuses them of being discriminatory or as having discriminated against someone else.
People discriminate against each other all the time. Though if you didn't know that. Or refused to acknowledge that. Then you could as @ArkNebradia and others have paint being accused of being discriminatory or someone saying you've discriminated against others as....being worse than nazis.
Something else they talked about is people's ability to effect their own prejudices. Which since i'm still getting over a slight cold sounded like pre juices.
Lets go over what you said once more.(You see no virtue in versatility?)
Again. Is racism moral? What about sexism? What about homophobia? What about transphobia? Nope. Nope. Nope and nope.
There is nothing moral about those things. There is morality in checking your own prejudices though.
Again. Is racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia versatile? Of course it isn't. The people who believe in those things literally limit themselves. Which flies directly in the face of the word.
There is those versatility in checking your own prejudices. In doing that a person opens up possibilities.
So everything you said in that one sentence, if we were to understand what those words mean and understand just how diverse those words are, is fully in line with not only what the person in the video said.....but in many ways with the core values conservatives who are religious wish they had.
And now we've gotten to weight. Which very much could be moved directly over to penis size shaming.
The media DOES influence how we view others. Be it their weight or penis size.
So lets recap. I'm saying there's a difference between difficulty and handicap. I'm saying words are important. Language is important.
Now. Lets see what @ArkNebradia had to say about this video.
(And they pretty much flat out say if you wouldn’t date a trans person, you are transphobic.)
Did they once in that video say that anyone was transphobic? As far as i can tell, they did not.
(fortunately, given the comments they’ve received from this video in the past, it appears most of the world doesn’t agree.)
Is this true? Is the world against everything that person in the video said? What they actually said instead of what @ArkNebradia said they said? Of course not. Everyone wants to become a better person than they were yesterday. We may not all agree on how to do so but every last point made in the video is flat out shared across every christian in america. Difference is, they don't all apply what was said in the video to trans people.
The basic core of what was said in the video though...
(You see no virtue in versatility?)
..is.
(The uploaders goal was to push their agenda and make people more “woke” about the situation.)
How exactly does he know that? Oh because woke just means more informed. The person in the video made said video for the specific purpose of telling people what words mean. What some actions mean. And @ArkNebradia is clearly against all of that.
Why? Well, when you're making mountains out of mole hills. Those pointing to it being mole hills are a problem for you.
(All that video did was push people who support the LGBT community, but aren’t necessarily a part of it, further away from their cause. It turns potential allies into enemies.)
Watch the video again. Is that what happened? Or is it wishful thinking? Again, as far as i can tell all the person in video did was explain the meaning of words. Explain in detail parts of a topic. And did so in the most accepting way possible. Or..in the most versatile way possible.
(to be honest, you kind of do the same with your rhetoric.)
What is the meaning of the word rhetoric?
[ the art of speaking or writing effectively: such as]
[ the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times ]
[ the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion ]
So it would seem. @ArkNebradia thinks i'm bad because....i speak and write effectively? Because i study the principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times? Because i'm good at understanding the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion?
Translation: You know what words mean and how to good convey ideas so you bad!
More in a bit.
spaj8987
Legendary Member
@Llbaker
Check this out. Keep in mind. I'm currently talking about the importance of words. The importance of language. Why there's a difference between difficult and handicap.
(But you seem more occupied with grouping me in with KKK members, and nazis, and white nationalists)
And right after having displayed that grouping people up with others is a bad thing. What does @ArkNebradia do?
(”villianizing” their own allies is a major stereotype the left has adopted recently, and I think it’s hurt them.)
And who exactly does said stereotyping? This is why words matter. This is why the meaning of words matters. Why language matters. Why how language is used matters.
Understand what i'm saying yet?
(that’s just my opinion though. I’m sure other right-leaning people feel the same.)
And immediately after. @ArkNebradia says....
(I don’t want to speak for anyone else,)
So we have @ArkNebradia misstating what was said in the video to an insane degree, them not knowing the meaning of words or refusing to use words properly, we have them flat out lying about what other people have said and them attempting to paint entire groups of people with the same brush.
AFTER having admitted to weeding out and filtering through people of color on his dating profile. Having lied about those who disagree with him. Followed them around from thread to thread. Said they hate white people just for criticizing donald trump. Attempted to say all accusations of racism by people of color and people of color only was used incorrectly. And will continue to do so.
Again. Words matter. Language. Matters. When you said...
(Yes, of course, white men have been deep into racial identity in the past, but, also, apparently less so now or at least more covertly.)
You hit the mother fucking nail on the mother fucking head.
Check this out. Keep in mind. I'm currently talking about the importance of words. The importance of language. Why there's a difference between difficult and handicap.
(But you seem more occupied with grouping me in with KKK members, and nazis, and white nationalists)
And right after having displayed that grouping people up with others is a bad thing. What does @ArkNebradia do?
(”villianizing” their own allies is a major stereotype the left has adopted recently, and I think it’s hurt them.)
And who exactly does said stereotyping? This is why words matter. This is why the meaning of words matters. Why language matters. Why how language is used matters.
Understand what i'm saying yet?
(that’s just my opinion though. I’m sure other right-leaning people feel the same.)
And immediately after. @ArkNebradia says....
(I don’t want to speak for anyone else,)
So we have @ArkNebradia misstating what was said in the video to an insane degree, them not knowing the meaning of words or refusing to use words properly, we have them flat out lying about what other people have said and them attempting to paint entire groups of people with the same brush.
AFTER having admitted to weeding out and filtering through people of color on his dating profile. Having lied about those who disagree with him. Followed them around from thread to thread. Said they hate white people just for criticizing donald trump. Attempted to say all accusations of racism by people of color and people of color only was used incorrectly. And will continue to do so.
Again. Words matter. Language. Matters. When you said...
(Yes, of course, white men have been deep into racial identity in the past, but, also, apparently less so now or at least more covertly.)
You hit the mother fucking nail on the mother fucking head.
@Llbaker
Check this out. Keep in mind. I'm currently talking about the importance of words. The importance of language. Why there's a difference between difficult and handicap.
(But you seem more occupied with grouping me in with KKK members, and nazis, and white nationalists)
And right after having displayed that grouping people up with others is a bad thing. What does @ArkNebradia do?
(”villianizing” their own allies is a major stereotype the left has adopted recently, and I think it’s hurt them.)
And who exactly does said stereotyping? This is why words matter. This is why the meaning of words matters. Why language matters. Why how language is used matters.
Understand what i'm saying yet?
(that’s just my opinion though. I’m sure other right-leaning people feel the same.)
And immediately after. @ArkNebradia says....
(I don’t want to speak for anyone else,)
So we have @ArkNebradia misstating what was said in the video to an insane degree, them not knowing the meaning of words or refusing to use words properly, we have them flat out lying about what other people have said and them attempting to paint entire groups of people with the same brush.
AFTER having admitted to weeding out and filtering through people of color on his dating profile. Having lied about those who disagree with him. Followed them around from thread to thread. Said they hate white people just for criticizing donald trump. Attempted to say all accusations of racism by people of color and people of color only was used incorrectly. And will continue to do so.
Again. Words matter. Language. Matters. When you said...
(Yes, of course, white men have been deep into racial identity in the past, but, also, apparently less so now or at least more covertly.)
You hit the mother fucking nail on the mother fucking head.
I don't have much to argue with in the above except to say that I don't accept the "demonizing" of words you appear indulge.
For instance, there is nothing wrong with the word handicap if used properly in a specific relative sense. The words crippled and disabled bit the dust because they were hard to use in a specific relative way and, thus, almost always used in a universal insulting way that was often inappropriate.
There is a movement to stop using the word handicapped also, but there is no good reason for that, except patronization. Differently "abled" or "challenged" is silly.
- Status
Similar threads
