Racism

[Mickactual]

My 2 ¢... I agree with the OP.
"Racism" and "type" are two entirely different things. We all have our "type" we're sexually attracted to, That doesn't necessarily mean we're racially prejudiced against anyone who isn't that type.
Me - personally - I'm only attracted to other caucasian men in a sexual way.
Now... eliminating sex from the equation... If You were to be my friend, co-worker, neighbour, drinking buddy, canasta partner - or WHATEVER, I couldn't give a fart in the wind whether You're yellow, black, red, white, blue, purple, or green.
That is to say - I don't think of myself as racist just because I have a particular type I'm sexually attracted to. And if anyone else wants to term me "racist" for it - well - that's their perogative and it's their problem, not mine.

 

[englad]

My 2 ¢... I agree with the OP.
"Racism" and "type" are two entirely different things. We all have our "type" we're sexually attracted to, That doesn't necessarily mean we're racially prejudiced against anyone who isn't that type.
Me - personally - I'm only attracted to other caucasian men in a sexual way.
Now... eliminating sex from the equation... If You were to be my friend, co-worker, neighbour, drinking buddy, canasta partner - or WHATEVER, I couldn't give a fart in the wind whether You're yellow, black, red, white, blue, purple, or green.
That is to say - I don't think of myself as racist just because I have a particular type I'm sexually attracted to. And if anyone else wants to term me "racist" for it - well - that's their perogative and it's their problem, not mine.

Seriously??? If you're only sexually attracted to one group, it means you ARE racially prejudiced against others.

The word preference has become the gay community's F word.

 

[Willifred]

Seriously??? If you're only sexually attracted to one group, it means you ARE racially prejudiced against others.

The word preference has become the gay community's F word.

Balls.

Prefering a 'type' is not the same as saying you'd never sleep with someone from a different background.

 

[englad]

Balls.

Prefering a 'type' is not the same as saying you'd never sleep with someone from a different background.

Actually the way it's used is, almost all of the time you hear "just a preference" it is preceded by no blacks, asians, whites etc

 

[B_Craiggers]

So lemme get this straight.

I have a sexual preference for women. In fact, I would only sleep with women.

So now I'm sexist?

Interesting.

 

[Remington]

So lemme get this straight.

I have a sexual preference for women. In fact, I would only sleep with women.

So now I'm sexist?

Interesting.

Very interesting.

Seriously though, preference is not bigotry.

 

[B_groats]

Its limited to base a desire on a persons skin or culture. It has to do with lesser availability to exposure to different groups of people and programing as to what is defined as attractive.
Sure call it racist but that term only expresses a reaction to those that are reactive.
Sounds like the world needs to leave media generalizations behind and go out and explore the for themselves.

 

[englad]

So lemme get this straight.

I have a sexual preference for women. In fact, I would only sleep with women.

So now I'm sexist?

Interesting.

Yawn bad analogy, heard it so many times. As far as I was aware women of all races have breasts and vaginas. So how is that even remotely the same?

 

[englad]

Very interesting.

Seriously though, preference is not bigotry.

Seeing as bigotry is a synonym of bias, discrimination and narrow-mindedness. Is it really so far off in the way it is used?

Race is not like body weight or shape, you can change those, but racial make-up is intrinsic and therefore if you are going to exclude someone because of something intrinsic like that, it is at the very least prejudicial and narrow-minded.

 

[kayman]

*sigh* another one of these racial situations where people are trying to see if something that inherent like your skin color as a basis of likeability/sexiness. This world is truly a fucked up place because just because you prefer something doesn't mean you exclude everything that doesn't fall into that group.

This is the true difference between preference and exclusion, preference means you prefer something but wouldn't be totally against something else; whereas, exclusion means anything and everything outside of that group is excluded or left out.

There is nothing 'PC' about and just own up to the fact that exclusion is occurring. The way it has been used in many personal profiles as a synonym for exclusion when that isn't the right way to use that word. This is why I am so annoyed with the words usage on sites like Craigslist, Adam4Adam, Manhunt, Grindr, Gaydar (US), etc. It should be just left out altogether.

Example: I have a very slight preference for other black men over other men (51-49 split), but presently talking to a white man. My preference doesn't stop me from allowing the very high likelihood of me having a relationship with this man in the future. However, if I was exclusionary then it would stop me because he isn't a black man.

 

[Remington]

Seeing as bigotry is a synonym of bias, discrimination and narrow-mindedness. Is it really so far off in the way it is used?

Race is not like body weight or shape, you can change those, but racial make-up is intrinsic and therefore if you are going to exclude someone because of something intrinsic like that, it is at the very least prejudicial and narrow-minded.

Thing is, people aren't sexually attracted to certain features. Regardless of if it's eye, hair, or skin color, the shape of their body, their age, etc...

That does not mean they automatically hate, are intolerant, or find people with their preferred features to be superior to all. It's solely a preference is a lot of cases. People just like what they like.

At most, I would consider it shallow, especially if they would just not bulge on certain preferences. But "racist"? Bit too strong of a word.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty racists and other sorts of bigots out there. But just having a preference does not make someone a bigot.

 

[MysticMedusa]

*sigh* another one of these racial situations where people are trying to see if something that inherent like your skin color as a basis of likeability/sexiness. This world is truly a fucked up place because just because you prefer something doesn't mean you exclude everything that doesn't fall into that group.

This is the true difference between preference and exclusion, preference means you prefer something but wouldn't be totally against something else; whereas, exclusion means anything and everything outside of that group is excluded or left out.

There is nothing 'PC' about and just own up to the fact that exclusion is occurring. The way it has been used in many personal profiles as a synonym for exclusion when that isn't the right way to use that word. This is why I am so annoyed with the words usage on sites like Craigslist, Adam4Adam, Manhunt, Grindr, Gaydar (US), etc. It should be just left out altogether.

Example: I have a very slight preference for other black men over other men (51-49 split), but presently talking to a white man. My preference doesn't stop me from allowing the very high likelihood of me having a relationship with this man in the future. However, if I was exclusionary then it would stop me because he isn't a black man.

So perfectly worded. This is exactly where we need to stop splitting hairs.

 

[B_Craiggers]

Race is not like body weight or shape, you can change those, but racial make-up is intrinsic and therefore if you are going to exclude someone because of something intrinsic like that, it is at the very least prejudicial and narrow-minded.

Oddly enough though, as someone who's racist (I do happen to hold racist views about African Americans), it's not exactly "instrinsic" features that generate that nuisance factor. It's cultural factors. I don't have issues w/ blacks because they have dark skin (or else I'd have issues with Indians who often have just as dark of skin, if not darker).

I have a good understanding of which of my views & opinions are prejudiced or racist and where they're coming from.

But physical attraction is it's own beast, and I think you're really confusing issues if you suggest that someone who isn't often physically attracted to members of a certain ethnicity is necessarily prejudiced and narrow minded.

 

[englad]

Thing is, people aren't sexually attracted to certain features. Regardless of if it's eye, hair, or skin color, the shape of their body, their age, etc...

That does not mean they automatically hate, are intolerant, or find people with their preferred features to be superior to all. It's solely a preference is a lot of cases. People just like what they like.

At most, I would consider it shallow, if they would just not bulge on certain preferences. But "racist"? Bit too strong of a word.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty racists and other sorts of bigots out there. But just having a preference does not make someone a bigot.

What features are you talking about? People within every racial group vary a lot on their features, some of the people you call "black" in the states could pass for "white" anywhere else. Some white people have wide noses and some black people have narrow noses. Some black people are fat/muscular, some are skinny/lean. It sounds like you're just stereotyping people.

Yes people like what they like, but it's often based on their environment and influences in the media.
Because in truth, when people use the word preference when they are talking about race, they mean exclusion NOT preference. This means people are discriminating against other people because of their race. This is known as sexual racism.


You do not have to be wearing a white sheet next to a burning cross screaming "let's go lynch us some n*****s" to be racist!

The point isn't to find every group EQUALLY attractive, but it is to at least admit you're attracted to some members of each group.

 

[MysticMedusa]

What features are you talking about? People within every racial group vary a lot on their features, some of the people you call "black" in the states could pass for "white" anywhere else. Some white people have wide noses and some black people have narrow noses. Some black people are fat/muscular, some are skinny/lean. It sounds like you're just stereotyping people.

Yes people like what they like, but it's often based on their environment and influences in the media.
Because in truth, when people use the word preference when they are talking about race, they mean exclusion NOT preference. This means people are discriminating against other people because of their race. This is known as sexual racism.


You do not have to be wearing a white sheet next to a burning cross screaming "let's go lynch us some n*****s" to be racist!

The point isn't to find every group EQUALLY attractive, but it is to at least admit you're attracted to some members of each group.

The civilizations of antiquity do carry specific DNA makeup.

 

[englad]

Oddly enough though, as someone who's racist (I do happen to hold racist views about African Americans), it's not exactly "instrinsic" features that generate that nuisance factor. It's cultural factors. I don't have issues w/ blacks because they have dark skin (or else I'd have issues with Indians who often have just as dark of skin, if not darker).

I have a good understanding of which of my views & opinions are prejudiced or racist and where they're coming from.

But physical attraction is it's own beast, and I think you're really confusing issues if you suggest that someone who isn't often physically attracted to members of a certain ethnicity is necessarily prejudiced and narrow minded.

Well I applaud you on admitting your racism, instead of couching it in bizarre terms. What cultural factors exactly are you talking about?

Where these formed independently, such as by exposure, media influences or environment?

Sounds like you probably base your opinions of black americans off the media and stereotypes rather than exposure. Given your location the culture you're likely to be familiar with is actually not far removed from black americans, similar accents, food is the same, style of religion is similar, same vague notions of social conservatism, similar traditions, similar outlooks on life, similar interests (like sport and so on). If you compared that to indians, it's a different planet altogether.

The point was never about often not being attracted to a different racial group, it was about completely excluding all members in that group regardless of individuality.

 

[englad]

The civilizations of antiquity do carry specific DNA makeup.

What's antiquity got to do with anything?

Seeing the massive amounts of human migrations and genetic mixing since then.

 

[MysticMedusa]

Their roots are still active in each respective human and what lends the shape to each body unless there has been generation upon generation within the same family of interracial coupling. Although it does happen it is not the norm.

Regardless, you diverge from the subject at hand.

 

[englad]

Their roots are still active in each respective human and what lends the shape to each body unless there has been generation upon generation within the same family of interracial coupling. Although it does happen it is not the norm.

Regardless, you diverge from the subject at hand.

No actually, one of the reasons that black americans don't look as "african" as other people in the diaspora is because they're often mixed. Not only that from a biological standpoint race does not exist, subsets of genes exist, but these are far more diverse than "race". For example no matter how well trained a jamaican can be at long distance running, he is NEVER going to beat an ethiopian. Even though from a societal prism they are both "black".

Race is a societal construct, not a biological one, yes people from different parts of the world vary in looks, but if you look into the intricacies of the human genome, a person from west africa is more similar to a person from northern europe than they are to a person from east africa.

 

[MysticMedusa]

No actually, one of the reasons that black americans don't look as "african" as other people in the diaspora is because they're often mixed. Not only that from a biological standpoint race does not exist, subsets of genes exist, but these are far more diverse than "race". For example no matter how well trained a jamaican can be at long distance running, he is NEVER going to beat an ethiopian. Even though from a societal prism they are both "black".

Are you kidding?? Have you never heard of spontaneous evolution?? Anyhow, we're still diverging 'cause if I fully answered you we would get into gross anatomy, more specifically fast and slow twitch muscle and that is very far from the subject at hand.

Race is a societal construct, not a biological one, yes people from different parts of the world vary in looks, but if you look into the intricacies of the human genome, a person from west africa is more similar to a person from northern europe than they are to a person from east africa.

It is societal AND biological.