Only Want to Date White Girls, is this Racist?

[United Marxist Nations]

You need a source that those with less sun-exposure have lighter skin?

Okay: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_skin ... ure_to_sun

Alright, I'll just go ahead and conclude you were making shit up when you said that the issue simply reduces to sun exposure and nothing more since you refuse to actually source that specific claim.

The funny part is that your claim is SOMEWHAT correct. There is a correlation there. The problem? It's primarily in East Asia and does NOT explain Nigeria.

Except that you didn't see cause 2) that I gave, which is directly related to racism.

[Mavorpen]

Alright, I'll just go ahead and conclude you were making shit up when you said that the issue simply reduces to sun exposure and nothing more since you refuse to actually source that specific claim.

The funny part is that your claim is SOMEWHAT correct. There is a correlation there. The problem? It's primarily in East Asia and does NOT explain Nigeria.

Except that you didn't see cause 2) that I gave, which is directly related to racism.

Wait, what? Why are you suddenly shifting the goal posts when we're explicitly talking about cause 1)?

[NAROLA-II]

It was on wikipedia, but I don't remember the actual page it was on. Also, of course there is such a thing as inherent attraction; one thing that is universal is facial symmetry.

I tend to take science in this with a grain of salt. This is quite a new subject being studied scientifically and you could also say scientifically people feel attracted based on social relevance in spite symmetry or anything else. Many times things end up contradicting themselves. That's why we should be away of strong positions on this like "everyone should date everyone"

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It was on wikipedia, but I don't remember the actual page it was on. Also, of course there is such a thing as inherent attraction; one thing that is universal is facial symmetry.

I tend to take science in this with a grain of salt. This is quite a new subject being studied scientifically and you could also say scientifically people feel attracted based on social relevance in spite symmetry or anything else. Many times things end up contradicting themselves. That's why we should be away of strong positions on this like "everyone should date everyone"

Well, interpreting "everyone should date everyone" is important, as well.

For instance, I'm going to date whoever I want, regardless of what other people tell me (yes, the ideology that X color is attractive and Y color is not and that X and Y races should not mix go hand in hand sometimes). Now, that I should be forced to date someone? No, but nobody is arguing for arranged marriages either.

[Mavorpen]

It was on wikipedia, but I don't remember the actual page it was on. Also, of course there is such a thing as inherent attraction; one thing that is universal is facial symmetry.

I tend to take science in this with a grain of salt. This is quite a new subject being studied scientifically and you could also say scientifically people feel attracted based on social relevance in spite symmetry or anything else. Many times things end up contradicting themselves. That's why we should be away of strong positions on this like "everyone should date everyone"

You can't really take away positions that don't exist.

[United Marxist Nations]

Except that you didn't see cause 2) that I gave, which is directly related to racism.

Wait, what? Why are you suddenly shifting the goal posts when we're explicitly talking about cause 1)?

Oh, sorry about that; thought you were saying that I thought that was the sole cause. Going from the process of elimination, we can find that, in the case of Nigeria, it must be cause 2) because cause 1) seems implausible. There may be different causes in other societies though, and we must examine that societal cause in every country. In some, it is a mixture of the two, and in others, there is likely a third, fourth, fifth, etc. cause. But, in Nigeria, it seems to be cause 2).

[United Marxist Nations]

It was on wikipedia, but I don't remember the actual page it was on. Also, of course there is such a thing as inherent attraction; one thing that is universal is facial symmetry.

I tend to take science in this with a grain of salt. This is quite a new subject being studied scientifically and you could also say scientifically people feel attracted based on social relevance in spite symmetry or anything else. Many times things end up contradicting themselves. That's why we should be away of strong positions on this like "everyone should date everyone"

What?

[Earth Empire]

Racism is saying or doing something that is intended to offend another race. Having a sexual preference is not racist.

[Mavorpen]

Oh, sorry about that; thought you were saying that I thought that was the sole cause. Going from the process of elimination, we can find that, in the case of Nigeria, it must be cause 2) because cause 1) seems implausible. There may be different causes in other societies though, and we must examine that societal cause in every country. In some, it is a mixture of the two, and in others, there is likely a third, fourth, fifth, etc. cause. But, in Nigeria, it seems to be cause 2).

It's fine, I admittedly wasn't clear in that post.

Anyway, I want you to explain step by step why cause 1 isn't inherently racist.

Because seems to me, it can't be anything but. If there's a belief that lighter skin=better because of the class connotation, then how exactly is that not racist? Why is the belief that lighter skin=higher class NOT racist? That is very clearly and obviously a racist stereotype.

I mean, would you seriously hear someone state, "black people are all poor welfare leeches" and not attribute that to racism? I realize there's a class basis there, but racism is still there.

[Mavorpen]

I tend to take science in this with a grain of salt. This is quite a new subject being studied scientifically and you could also say scientifically people feel attracted based on social relevance in spite symmetry or anything else. Many times things end up contradicting themselves. That's why we should be away of strong positions on this like "everyone should date everyone"

What?

I think he's saying that he doesn't take science surrounding sexual preference seriously.

I don't know why...

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Racism is saying or doing something that is intended to offend another race. Having a sexual preference is not racist.

Sexual preferences are not, in and of themselves racist.

The reasoning behind them can be founded in racism though.

[United Marxist Nations]

Oh, sorry about that; thought you were saying that I thought that was the sole cause. Going from the process of elimination, we can find that, in the case of Nigeria, it must be cause 2) because cause 1) seems implausible. There may be different causes in other societies though, and we must examine that societal cause in every country. In some, it is a mixture of the two, and in others, there is likely a third, fourth, fifth, etc. cause. But, in Nigeria, it seems to be cause 2).

It's fine, I admittedly wasn't clear in that post.

Anyway, I want you to explain step by step why cause 1 isn't inherently racist.

Because seems to me, it can't be anything but. If there's a belief that lighter skin=better because of the class connotation, then how exactly is that not racist? Why is the belief that lighter skin=higher class NOT racist? That is very clearly and obviously a racist stereotype.

I mean, would you seriously hear someone state, "black people are all poor welfare leeches" and not attribute that to racism? I realize there's a class basis there, but racism is still there.

I meant in the pre-colonial societies: you would have those in the lower class working the fields, having more exposure to the sun, giving them darker skin; meanwhile, the upper or ruling classes would spend more time inside doing more administrative work.

[NAROLA-II]

Ok, just answered at the same way I was answered but ok, thanks for the warning.

-snip-.

The problem with your logic is that you're using consequentialism (the intentions don't matter, the action and results count) as a standard of measurement.

No, my argument is exactly the opposite. It's precisely the intentions that matters. The attitude of a racist or a non racist might be the same, what makes them different is exactly the intentions. If you don't know the intentions behind dating just some kind of people, you can't say they are/aren't racist. The action itself is not wrong or racist, it may be depending on the intention.

Whereas on your coffee example, the tea aficionado might like just tea to the point he doesn't like coffee. Doesn't mean he thinks coffee people are inferior or anything. Besides, this is such a personal decision this is almost a philosophical-only debate. Without knowing what the person thinks, it's pure speculation.

For instance, yeah, coffee might be inferior to his taste. Asian men can be considered inferior in beauty or any other characteristic by a black woman. Asian women might consider white male behavior as inferior according to their tastes. At which point this stops being preference and starts being racism? It's far from being as simple as saying that if it's not considered equal, it's racism.

Most importantly, when we became such crying babyes that we can't accept the fact the each one of us has higher and lower places to each other without calling everything racism or prejudice. Let's not lie here, if some one likes black woman the most (for their looks, for instance) then probably every other women from other races are inferior in that regard for this man. Is that racist? I don't think so, as long as this man is able to see this is a PERSONAL preference and not an universal truth. Also, such man must keep respect.

If it's purely based on physical attraction, that's not necessarily racist. You can't help what you're physically attracted to, and if you can't get off to anything but white women then fine. No different than a strong preference for height, hair colour or something like that.

If it's based on perceived behavioural qualities of white people compared to other ethnic groups, then it's pretty racist.

Precisely. Race is just another trait, people like to glorify it or talk about it as something non-discussable (as if you should just like absolutely everything) because it has appeal and because it makes them look good. They will then become with all "scientific and historic" excuses they can. Well, for every preference of ours there might be thousands of unholy reasons behind it and liking some kind of people is just another one. White people were once slaves as well in many parts of the world, fat people were once seen as rich and people kept liking or disliking white, fat or lean people no matter that back then and now.

Also, on such a personal preference subject, would it really change anything if someone bases its likings on "social construction" or even perception? This is so much of a "it's not my problem thing" it's silly to make too much on it. Also, most importantly, independent of prejudice or perception, people like people similar to their own. As someone said, it's even science is backing this up (though it's already pretty clear to anyone to see).

[Zaldakki]

Damn it, I didn't realize this many white girls were not attracted to asians. That's fucking depressing because I live in Nashville, where the vast majority of girls are white.

[United Marxist Nations]

Damn it, I didn't realize this many white girls were not attracted to asians. That's fucking depressing because I live in Nashville, where the vast majority of girls of girls are white.

Hey, we don't live too far away.

[Mavorpen]

It's fine, I admittedly wasn't clear in that post.

Anyway, I want you to explain step by step why cause 1 isn't inherently racist.

Because seems to me, it can't be anything but. If there's a belief that lighter skin=better because of the class connotation, then how exactly is that not racist? Why is the belief that lighter skin=higher class NOT racist? That is very clearly and obviously a racist stereotype.

I mean, would you seriously hear someone state, "black people are all poor welfare leeches" and not attribute that to racism? I realize there's a class basis there, but racism is still there.

I meant in the pre-colonial societies: you would have those in the lower class working the fields, having more exposure to the sun, giving them darker skin; meanwhile, the upper or ruling classes would spend more time inside doing more administrative work.

Ah. In that case, I don't really see the relevance in regards to my posts on the issue. Because slavery came around and one race subjugated another, this isn't a valid explanation as it is in East Asia.

[Zaldakki]

She's doing such a cute thing in her profile pic, but she says she's not attracted to asian guys.

[Rabbidskiya Republika]

Preferences are not Racist, unless you are a Racist for other reasons as well as having the Preferences.

I prefer White Women, but Black Ladies are ok too, same with Asian Women, Latinas, etc. Each Race has general differences in how they look, other than skin color, which is the usual factor in preferences.

Preferences do not mean you are a Racist. I have several friends of different Races, so does having a preference make me a Racist? NO. It does not.

Well a preference is that you like one thing more than another. If you like white women but are open to date other races then no, you're not racist.

Plain refusal to date someone because of their skin color is racist.

Exactly. I like all types of women, but like white women more. Especially Eastern European and Scandinavian women.

[Zaldakki]

It's not racist, but it feels just as limiting to me as racism when girls tell me they're not attracted to me because I'm asian.

[NAROLA-II]

All I'm saying about science is that it's new on this subject and we should not take everything as truth just because it's science. Many simple day to day observations on attraction trumps theories like symmetrical face.

On Nigeria on the other hand, lol. Excuse my lack of diplomacy. They do it because of sheer stupidity, they are probably racist or classicist as well like someone said, maybe they do it because most do. Probably they think whiter skin=rich and will use any product to look that way because stupid. I know people in my country who will put stupid things in their mouths to look good because some famous people did similar things. Later that will end up into serious infection or diseases that may even cause big harm to the whole body. Many white folks roast on the sun for hours, sometimes without any sunscreen, to look tanned (because tanned is considered to look good here). Skin problems, even serious ones, are very common as a result.

We should put stupidity apart from racism or even preference. Some people that do those things don't even think they look good, they do because it's a fad or because everyone does it. I'm also of the position that if anyone REALLY doesn't like the way they are, they should be free to be how they want (in a safe manner). When I mean really I'm not talking about such stupid things, obviously.

Well, interpreting "everyone should date everyone" is important, as well.

For instance, I'm going to date whoever I want, regardless of what other people tell me (yes, the ideology that X color is attractive and Y color is not and that X and Y races should not mix go hand in hand sometimes). Now, that I should be forced to date someone? No, but nobody is arguing for arranged marriages either.

You interpreted it precisely the way I meant it. Though, if it were for one or two here, we would certainly be forced to arrange marriages and such. Otherwise you would, at the very least, be seen as a racist hater who thinks other are disgusting and some public policy should be taken against you.

[The Black Forrest]

She's doing such a cute thing in her profile pic, but she says she's not attracted to asian guys.

Why are you paying attention to her?

[The Black Forrest]

All I'm saying about science is that it's new on this subject and we should not take everything as truth just because it's science.

[NAROLA-II]

It's not racist, but it feels just as limiting to me as racism when girls tell me they're not attracted to me because I'm asian.

Can be tough mate. But to be honest, it feels just the same when they say you are "not her kind" and you can't do anything about it just as you cannot do anything about it. Anyway, better free with preferences than knowing someone is with you just not to look "racist/bigot/old style/uncool/anything"

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Ok, just answered at the same way I was answered but ok, thanks for the warning.

The problem with your logic is that you're using consequentialism (the intentions don't matter, the action and results count) as a standard of measurement.

No, my argument is exactly the opposite. It's precisely the intentions that matters. The attitude of a racist or a non racist might be the same, what makes them different is exactly the intentions. If you don't know the intentions behind dating just some kind of people, you can't say they are/aren't racist. The action itself is not wrong or racist, it may be depending on the intention.

Whereas on your coffee example, the tea aficionado might like just tea to the point he doesn't like coffee. Doesn't mean he thinks coffee people are inferior or anything. Besides, this is such a personal decision this is almost a philosophical-only debate. Without knowing what the person thinks, it's pure speculation.

For instance, yeah, coffee might be inferior to his taste. Asian men can be considered inferior in beauty or any other characteristic by a black woman. Asian women might consider white male behavior as inferior according to their tastes. At which point this stops being preference and starts being racism? It's far from being as simple as saying that if it's not considered equal, it's racism.

Most importantly, when we became such crying babyes that we can't accept the fact the each one of us has higher and lower places to each other without calling everything racism or prejudice. Let's not lie here, if some one likes black woman the most (for their looks, for instance) then probably every other women from other races are inferior in that regard for this man. Is that racist? I don't think so, as long as this man is able to see this is a PERSONAL preference and not an universal truth. Also, such man must keep respect.

Yes, no, I understand that he thinks that coffee tastes better and he doesn't like coffee. What I'm getting at is this: that, in the lack of other factors, you refuse to date an entire race of people entirely because of their race, that's racist. To find one race more attractive than another isn't racist, is simply preferences. If I like tea more than coffee I am not going to not date a coffee drinker simply because they like coffee as opposed to tea; that'd be illogical and discriminatory. That I'd politely refuse to drink coffee while she drinks coffee and I drink tea, or even that I'm going to gather more likely with tea drinkers than coffee drinkers? Yes, I might do that, but not straight up say "I am not going to date you simply because you date coffee, and I don't like people who drink coffee".

In the same vein, everyone does have higher and lower priorities in dating, yes, but that doesn't mean that these values do not correspond to someone's social view of the world. If you are raised thinking racism is okay and is okay to discriminate against blacks and that whoever dates a black person is a traitor, that's most certainly racist. When it comes to preferences, to just say "I prefer to date white women who are redheads" is different than saying "I will never date black women because black women are icky". You see what I'm saying? I am NOT saying preferences are not okay, I am saying preferences based on racism are NOT Okay.

[Honey Badger Community]

Yes, it's horribly racist.

Preferring a race or races to others is racist.

I totally agree. I suppose you won't date female honey badgers too. That is specieist and sexist