Only Want to Date White Girls, is this Racist?

[Seriong]

Why? I doesn't change a single thing about my point.

Sure it does! It means you have waaaay too much time on your hands if you are concerned by the notion that someones lack of attraction to anyone outside of a particular ethnic group is racism.

Classification doesn't mean one is advocating action on that classification.

Is it sexist to only want to date women?

Are you really comparing sex and race?

Really?

Are we going there? Of all the dark alleys to go down?

Can we actually address the logic behind comparisons, rather than simply act incredulous?
Not to say I agree with him, merely that I absolutely abhor that conversational style.

No, excluding gender from this debate is the only intellectually honest thing you could do concerning it.

Your environment (i.e. the media, advertisements, social norms, etc.) does not want to make you want to only fuck women. Being subject to advertisements of attractive men will not make you want to fuck a man. Being subject to media and advertisements portraying that light skin=good and dark skin=bad combined with social norms tracing back to slavery, can, and does impact your desire to only date white women.

So you're saying that in a natural environment, devoid of social pressure, no one would have racial preferences?

That's patantly false.

No, it's impossible to determine, because we have no idea what that system would even be, and have never observed one.

No, excluding gender from this debate is the only intellectually honest thing you could do concerning it.

Your environment (i.e. the media, advertisements, social norms, etc.) does not want to make you want to only fuck women. Being constantly subject to advertisements of attractive men over the course of your life will not make you want to fuck a man. Being subject to media and advertisements portraying that light skin=good and dark skin=bad combined with social norms tracing back to slavery, can, and does impact your desire to only date white women.

Based on what facts do you get this?
Never have I personally heard, "Oh, all those white women on T.V. make me less attracted to people of darker skin colors."

I don't personally want to get into this conflict in a partisan manner, but that argument doesn't work, because Mav is talking about advertising as it affects you in a subconscious manner.

You don't even need to go down this route. See, the thing is, this topic you're discussing DOES fall under institutional racism. The overwhelming preference for lighter skin is an institutionalized racism that traces back to the period of slavery in the United States. I continued throughout reconstruction and it continues today.

Overwhelmingly preference for lighter skin? What are you talking about? Most people date within their own race. Which is what this topic is about. Dating, and whether or not finding certain races more attractive (or exclusively attractive) is racist. Most people find members of their own race the most attractive, and most people end up being in relationships with members of their own race. That's not an "overwhelming preference for ligher skin."

I hate to quote stormfront here, but light ain't white. Mav is referring to a trend where even in African American culture, people will have a preference for lighter skinned black people.

[Mavorpen]

No, it's impossible to determine, because we have no idea what that system would even be, and have never observed one.

That's probably because it isn't possible for such a state to exist. Humans are social creatures, even in our "natural environment." Social pressure exists no matter what as long as that's true.

[Mavorpen]

I hate to quote stormfront here, but light ain't white. Mav is referring to a trend where even in African American culture, people will have a preference for lighter skinned black people.

Also, I feel like I should thank you for addressing his blatant and silly straw men. I really don't have the patience anymore to deal with them.

[Kargintina]

If you aren't attracted to non-white girls how is that racist? You don't control your attractions.

[Aurora Novus]

No one =/= everyone. While most people don't think that way that doesn't mean there's someone we do not know that thinks that way.

I fully recognize there are people out there who think that way. And I find them to be deplorable people. But the fact that those people exist does not mean that, in of itself, dating only people are certain races is racist. Because there is nothing inherent to doing so that necessitates racist reasoning being used as the basis.

And yes, being picky over race and not compromising is racist because, and here's the catch, you are putting someone's race as a standard for them to be "good partners"; it's racist logic because it means you will go for someone less attractive because they are your skin color and not for someone who is both attractive and a good partner simply because of their skin color. That is what racist logic is: using race as a value standard.

What the fuck? "They'll go to someone less attractive"? Where are you getting this from? Attractiveness is a subjective value judgement, and while to you, the person they go to might be less attractive, to them, the person they denied was less attractive. That's why the fucking rejected them. We're not talking about people who say "Gee, this X race person is really great, but they're X race. so I can't date them. I'll go with the uglier person, 'cause they're Y race." We're talking about people who's definition of attractiveness includes race as one of it's criteria. To them, person X isn't physically attractive. So what, they're bad people for not finding certain races physically attractive? Something they can't control? Or are they bad people for not going out with people they aren't attracted to? What the fuck? This is why your reasoning on racism is so fucking stupid.

You just said one upon the other. "I don't find X race physically attractive" is saying "X race is somehow superior to Y race(s)".

No, it's not. To continuously try and conflate the two on your part is pure intellectual dishonesty. Simply put, you're lying.

If your logic was "I find X race attractive, so I incline to date X race" then that means you may consider other races, depending on other factors, but NOT that you're excluding them.

So what you're saying is that unless someone is willing to date people they don't find attractive, they're racist.

This is why your definition of racism is fucking stupid. This is also why, again, your entire logic is based upon an entitlement complex. You are not entitles to date someone, you have no reason to expect anyone to find you attractive and datable. No one "deserves" to be dated. No one "deserves" a relationship. Your complaint here is literally, literally fucking equivalent to "nice guys" complaining about women not dating them, and claiming that these women are scum for not being willing to "at least try". You are not fucking entitled to a fucking relationship.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I hate to quote stormfront here, but light ain't white. Mav is referring to a trend where even in African American culture, people will have a preference for lighter skinned black people.

Also, I feel like I should thank you for addressing his blatant and silly straw men. I really don't have the patience anymore to deal with them.

It's like they don't understand how minorities work.

Even in Latin American culture, most Latinos from other countries who are not living here in the U.S. find white, blonde, blue eyed women desirable and a trophy of their manliness if they can date and marry a white woman. They are certainly more respected by their peers.

[Mavorpen]

Also, I feel like I should thank you for addressing his blatant and silly straw men. I really don't have the patience anymore to deal with them.

It's like they don't understand how minorities work.

Even in Latin American culture, most Latinos from other countries who are not living here in the U.S. find white, blonde, blue eyed women desirable and a trophy of their manliness if they can date and marry a white woman. They are certainly more respected by their peers.

India has the same issue. Indian parents actually have quite a bit of difficulty obtaining dowrys for their daughters if they're dark skinned.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

So what you're saying is that unless someone is willing to date people they don't find attractive, they're racist.

This is why your definition of racism is fucking stupid. This is also why, again, your entire logic is based upon an entitlement complex. You are not entitles to date someone, you have no reason to expect anyone to find you attractive and datable. No one "deserves" to be dated. No one "deserves" a relationship. Your complaint here is literally, literally fucking equivalent to "nice guys" complaining about women not dating them, and claiming that these women are scum for not being willing to "at least try". You are not fucking entitled to a fucking relationship.

I am not saying that someone is willing to date people they don't find attractive is racist. What I am saying is that, the perception that people are attractive just because of their skin color is racist, different things.

Also, were I to have an entitlement complex, I wouldn't have dated various races. Your logic makes no fucking sense when it comes to addressing my point at all. Try again.

[Mavorpen]

So what you're saying is that unless someone is willing to date people they don't find attractive, they're racist.

This is why your definition of racism is fucking stupid. This is also why, again, your entire logic is based upon an entitlement complex. You are not entitles to date someone, you have no reason to expect anyone to find you attractive and datable. No one "deserves" to be dated. No one "deserves" a relationship. Your complaint here is literally, literally fucking equivalent to "nice guys" complaining about women not dating them, and claiming that these women are scum for not being willing to "at least try". You are not fucking entitled to a fucking relationship.

I am not saying that someone is willing to date people they don't find attractive is racist. What I am saying is that, the perception that people are attractive just because of their skin color is racist, different things.

Also, were I to have an entitlement complex, I would have dated various races. Your logic makes no fucking sense when it comes to addressing my point at all. Try again.

I'm sitting here wondering why you're even bothering at this point. The fact that he insists upon attacking a caricature of your argument where you express "entitlement" to being dated shows that he really, really don't have a coherent argument to stand upon.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It's like they don't understand how minorities work.

Even in Latin American culture, most Latinos from other countries who are not living here in the U.S. find white, blonde, blue eyed women desirable and a trophy of their manliness if they can date and marry a white woman. They are certainly more respected by their peers.

India has the same issue. Indian parents actually have quite a bit of difficulty obtaining dowrys for their daughters if they're dark skinned.

I mean, it's not an issue that confronts WHITE people per se, white people date whoever they want because they can. The ones who have these perceptions are minorities themselves (for the most part), the ones who see darker skin colors as less desirable and lighter skin tones as more desirable. White people can have preferences, sure; and is completely valid Nova's point from a white person's perspective. However, it doesn't apply universally and in fact most minorities tend to think the same way about light skin/dark skin.

[Aurora Novus]

I am not saying that someone is willing to date people they don't find attractive is racist. What I am saying is that, the perception that people are attractive just because of their skin color is racist, different things.

And that's a stupid way of defining racism, as I've preivously said. "It's discriminatory" is a child's way of defining racism. You're actually generating harm by defining racism that way, not preventing it.

People have preferences, get over it. People don't value all traits equally, and there's nothing wrong with that. People have preferences, people have favorites. Favorite sizes, favorite colours, and skin colour is one of those. Just like hair and eye colour. Just like sex and age. Height and weight. It's one of a plethora of catagories people find physically attractive. Your whining that people don't find all races equally attractive is fucking dumb. It's childish. It's entitled.

Also, were I to have an entitlement complex, I would have dated various races. Your logic makes no fucking sense when it comes to addressing my point at all. Try again.

My logic makes perfect sense, you just don't want to see it. You're complaining that people have standards. You're complaining that some people are not willing to date anyone they meet. You're complaining that someone might reject someone else when yuo see that person as perfectly datable. That's an entitlement complex. You are not fucking entitled to a relationship.

[Mavorpen]

India has the same issue. Indian parents actually have quite a bit of difficulty obtaining dowrys for their daughters if they're dark skinned.

I mean, it's not an issue that confronts WHITE people per se, white people date whoever they want because they can. The ones who have these perceptions are minorities themselves, the ones who see darker skin colors as less desirable and lighter skin tones as more desirable. White people can have preferences, sure; and is completely valid Nova's point from a white person's perspective. However, it doesn't apply universally and in fact most minorities tend to think the same way about light skin/dark skin.

Seems to me this is a case of, "doesn't harm me or people like me, so it isn't a problem."

[Seriong]

If you aren't attracted to non-white girls how is that racist? You don't control your attractions.

You're confusing and conflating 'racist' and 'wrong.' By dint of something being determined racist, under the definition that it places a notable distinction between races, it depends upon the motivation for such a distinction to determine if such is actually wrong. Just as if someone was raised in a terrible backwards and racist environment, they're racist for calling black people 'nigger' but not necessarily a bad person for doing so, as they cannot really be held that responsible for their actions. (In this example, the person has never left that backwards environment)

I hate to quote stormfront here, but light ain't white. Mav is referring to a trend where even in African American culture, people will have a preference for lighter skinned black people.

Also, I feel like I should thank you for addressing his blatant and silly straw men. I really don't have the patience anymore to deal with them.

I just hate people misunderstanding and thus talking past each other.

No one =/= everyone. While most people don't think that way that doesn't mean there's someone we do not know that thinks that way.

I fully recognize there are people out there who think that way. And I find them to be deplorable people. But the fact that those people exist does not mean that, in of itself, dating only people are certain races is racist. Because there is nothing inherent to doing so that necessitates racist reasoning being used as the basis.

That wasn't his point. His point there was taking umbrage with your continual use of "no one" when referring to racists.
You say this:

But, more to the point, no one even thinks that way. No one (see: most people)

When you mean 'most people don't think that way.'

And yes, being picky over race and not compromising is racist because, and here's the catch, you are putting someone's race as a standard for them to be "good partners"; it's racist logic because it means you will go for someone less attractive because they are your skin color and not for someone who is both attractive and a good partner simply because of their skin color. That is what racist logic is: using race as a value standard.

What the fuck? "They'll go to someone less attractive"? Where are you getting this from? Attractiveness is a subjective value judgement, and while to you, the person they go to might be less attractive, to them, the person they denied was less attractive. That's why the fucking rejected them. We're not talking about people who say "Gee, this X race person is really great, but they're X race. so I can't date them. I'll go with the uglier person, 'cause they're Y race." We're talking about people who's definition of attractiveness includes race as one of it's criteria. To them, person X isn't physically attractive. So what, they're bad people for not finding certain races physically attractive? Something they can't control? Or are they bad people for not going out with people they aren't attracted to? What the fuck? This is why your reasoning on racism is so fucking stupid.

See what I wrote to Kargintina. He's saying 'racist' you're saying 'wrong' and 'bad person' they aren't all the same.

You just said one upon the other. "I don't find X race physically attractive" is saying "X race is somehow superior to Y race(s)".

No, it's not. To continuously try and conflate the two on your part is pure intellectual dishonesty. Simply put, you're lying

You're jumping the gun. He may very well be mistaken, but unless you have some reason to know him to know otherwise, you have a bit to go before saying he's lying.

If your logic was "I find X race attractive, so I incline to date X race" then that means you may consider other races, depending on other factors, but NOT that you're excluding them.

So what you're saying is that unless someone is willing to date people they don't find attractive, they're racist.

No, he's saying that if your metric for determining someone's attractiveness is based on race, then you're racist. Your willingness to date people you find ugly is quite irrelevant.

[Aurora Novus]

I mean, it's not an issue that confronts WHITE people per se, white people date whoever they want because they can. The ones who have these perceptions are minorities themselves, the ones who see darker skin colors as less desirable and lighter skin tones as more desirable. White people can have preferences, sure; and is completely valid Nova's point from a white person's perspective. However, it doesn't apply universally and in fact most minorities tend to think the same way about light skin/dark skin.

Seems to me this is a case of, "doesn't harm me or people like me, so it isn't a problem."

No, it's an issue of "that's not the fucking question the topic is asking."

[Soldati Senza Confini]

My logic makes perfect sense, you just don't want to see it. You're complaining that people have standards. You're complaining that some people are not willing to date anyone they meet. You're complaining that someone might reject someone else when yuo see that person as perfectly datable. That's an entitlement complex. You are not fucking entitled to a relationship.

Try again, without the whole "entitlement complex" bullshit.

[Aurora Novus]

That wasn't his point. His point there was taking umbrage with your continual use of "no one" when referring to racists.
You say this:

But, more to the point, no one even thinks that way. No one (see: most people)

When you mean 'most people don't think that way.'

I understand what his point was. Evidently, you've missed the point in my response.

See what I wrote to Kargintina. He's saying 'racist' you're saying 'wrong' and 'bad person' they aren't all the same.

And that's been my overarching point in this entire thread. Defining racism to include things which we don't consider wrong is a fucking stupid and inane way of defining racism. Racism should be defined in ways which confine to to explicielty harmful or "bad" things. Because if you define racism the way you do, yeah, dating only certain races is racist. But it's also not wrong, so to call it racist is entirely pointless, and only serves to muddy the term.

You're jumping the gun. He may very well be mistaken, but unless you have some reason to know him to know otherwise, you have a bit to go before saying he's lying.

I've made the point several times in the thread, and he;s responded to it several times. At this point, I'm convinced it's pure intellectual dishonesty on his part.

No, he's saying that if your metric for determining someone's attractiveness is based on race, then you're racist. Your willingness to date people you find ugly is quite irrelevant.

And as I said, that's a fucking stupid way of defining racism. "It's discriminatory" is a child's way of defining racism. By that fucking logic, a conference seeking a well-thought of black figure in society to speak at a conference on race issues facing blacks, is being racist. What the fucking fuck? It's absolutely moronic.

[Aurora Novus]

My logic makes perfect sense, you just don't want to see it. You're complaining that people have standards. You're complaining that some people are not willing to date anyone they meet. You're complaining that someone might reject someone else when yuo see that person as perfectly datable. That's an entitlement complex. You are not fucking entitled to a relationship.

Try again, without the whole "entitlement complex" bullshit.

I'm sorry you don't want to recognize your own entitlement complex, but your inability to face reality, frankly, is not my problem.

[Seriong]

My logic makes perfect sense, you just don't want to see it. You're complaining that people have standards. You're complaining that some people are not willing to date anyone they meet. You're complaining that someone might reject someone else when yuo see that person as perfectly datable. That's an entitlement complex. You are not fucking entitled to a relationship.

Try again, without the whole "entitlement complex" bullshit.

His argument is that if were the one people were seeking to have a relationship with, rather than the seeker, and you held the position that you do on this issue, you would be entitled. His reasoning is thus,
He accepts two premises:
1) People should make an effort to not do things that are wrong
2) Racism is wrong
By calling his preference racist, he takes that as calling it wrong, making him a bad person, and thus also imploring him to change his preferences. As the only way to examine this is to examine the results of his preferences, you are essentially asking him to change the ways he expresses these preferences. Therefore, he is being asked to date those he finds unattractive (being those outside his race) and thus if you are one among the population being sought by relationship seekers, you are expressing something that paints you as entitled, as you are imploring people to hold your state in higher regards than their own, as you are asking him to abandon his preferences, but not the sought's.

I do this as I hold doubts that he will fulfill your request.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Try again, without the whole "entitlement complex" bullshit.

I'm sorry you don't want to recognize your own entitlement complex, but your inability to face reality, frankly, is not my problem.

And your willingness to be willfully ignorant of my argument isn't my problem either; I'd rather speak to a rock than speak to someone who, frankly, doesn't get a word I'm saying.

[Aurora Novus]

I'm sorry you don't want to recognize your own entitlement complex, but your inability to face reality, frankly, is not my problem.

And your willingness to be willfully ignorant of my argument isn't my problem either; I'd rather speak to a rock than speak to someone who, frankly, doesn't get a word I'm saying.

I'm understanding what you're say perfectly. It's just fucking stupid.

[Seriong]

That wasn't his point. His point there was taking umbrage with your continual use of "no one" when referring to racists.
You say this:

When you mean 'most people don't think that way.'

I understand what his point was. Evidently, you've missed the point in my response.

What was the point I missed in the quoted text?
I said such because the 'point' there was unwarranted, as he said nothing to provoke it, and to believe it to be warranted required misunderstanding his post.

See what I wrote to Kargintina. He's saying 'racist' you're saying 'wrong' and 'bad person' they aren't all the same.

And that's been my overarching point in this entire thread. Defining racism to include things which we don't consider wrong is a fucking stupid and inane way of defining racism. Racism should be defined in ways which confine to to explicielty harmful or "bad" things. Because if you define racism the way you do, yeah, dating only certain races is racist. But it's also not wrong, so to call it racist is entirely pointless, and only serves to muddy the term.

Why?

You're jumping the gun. He may very well be mistaken, but unless you have some reason to know him to know otherwise, you have a bit to go before saying he's lying.

I've made the point several times in the thread, and he;s responded to it several times. At this point, I'm convinced it's pure intellectual dishonesty on his part.

And I'm saying you aren't justified in being convinced yet. You can be suspicious, sure.

No, he's saying that if your metric for determining someone's attractiveness is based on race, then you're racist. Your willingness to date people you find ugly is quite irrelevant.

And as I said, that's a fucking stupid way of defining racism. "It's discriminatory" is a child's way of defining racism. By that fucking logic, a conference seeking a well-thought of black figure in society to speak at a conference on race issues facing blacks, is being racist. What the fucking fuck? It's absolutely moronic.

No, his definition is essentially "To act or hold a distinction that is arbitrary, using race as the distinction, and supporting the distinction in a false manner" By such a definition seeking that black figure would not be racist, as you aren't using race in a manner that is a false justification.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Try again, without the whole "entitlement complex" bullshit.

His argument is that if were the one people were seeking to have a relationship with, rather than the seeker, and you held the position that you do on this issue, you would be entitled. His reasoning is thus,
He accepts two premises:
1) People should make an effort to not do things that are wrong
2) Racism is wrong
By calling his preference racist, he takes that as calling it wrong, making him a bad person, and thus also imploring him to change his preferences. As the only way to examine this is to examine the results of his preferences, you are essentially asking him to change the ways he expresses these preferences. Therefore, he is being asked to date those he finds unattractive (being those outside his race) and thus if you are one among the population being sought by relationship seekers, you are expressing something that paints you as entitled, as you are imploring people to hold your state in higher regards than their own, as you are asking him to abandon his preferences, but not the sought's.

I do this as I hold doubts that he will fulfill your request.

Right, however, that's not even what I'm addressing; at all.

You're right he is understanding this and I perhaps didn't see it. However that was not my argument. Holding a race value doesn't make him a wrong person. It merely makes his preference built upon racist logic, but it doesn't make him a bad person.

Basically, awareness of one's decisions and the rationale one is making them is what I am arguing, not whether a person is wrong in holding these assertions or not. It happens, there's preferences because of all kinds of reasons, and that's normal. I admit I have flaws myself in logic, and I get that; however, my flaws in logic don't make me a bad person in and of itself, they just make me ignorant of my own biases, which is perfectly normal and as I get older and more mature I realize the biases of my own arguments, which, again is normal.

I sincerely doubt he looks at it that way though.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

And your willingness to be willfully ignorant of my argument isn't my problem either; I'd rather speak to a rock than speak to someone who, frankly, doesn't get a word I'm saying.

I'm understanding what you're say perfectly. It's just fucking stupid.

You obviously don't, otherwise you wouldn't be calling my points stupid.

[Seriong]

His argument is that if were the one people were seeking to have a relationship with, rather than the seeker, and you held the position that you do on this issue, you would be entitled. His reasoning is thus,
He accepts two premises:
1) People should make an effort to not do things that are wrong
2) Racism is wrong
By calling his preference racist, he takes that as calling it wrong, making him a bad person, and thus also imploring him to change his preferences. As the only way to examine this is to examine the results of his preferences, you are essentially asking him to change the ways he expresses these preferences. Therefore, he is being asked to date those he finds unattractive (being those outside his race) and thus if you are one among the population being sought by relationship seekers, you are expressing something that paints you as entitled, as you are imploring people to hold your state in higher regards than their own, as you are asking him to abandon his preferences, but not the sought's.

I do this as I hold doubts that he will fulfill your request.

Right, however, that's not even what I'm addressing; at all.

You're right he is understanding this and I perhaps didn't see it. However that was not my argument. Holding a race value doesn't make him a wrong person. It merely makes his preference built upon racist logic, but it doesn't make him a racist or a bad person.

Basically, awareness of one's decisions and the rationale one is making them is what I am arguing, not whether a person is wrong in holding these assertions or not. It happens, there's preferences because of all kinds of reasons, and that's normal. I admit I have flaws myself in logic, and I get that; however, my flaws in logic don't make me a bad person in and of itself, they just make me ignorant of my own biases, which is perfectly normal and as I get older and more mature I realize the biases of my own arguments, which, again is normal.

I sincerely doubt he looks at it that way though.

I know it doesn't apply to your position, and I know it's flawed. I merely put it there because I doubted you would be able to gleam his meaning from the anger and swearing.

[Mavorpen]

His argument is that if were the one people were seeking to have a relationship with, rather than the seeker, and you held the position that you do on this issue, you would be entitled. His reasoning is thus,
He accepts two premises:
1) People should make an effort to not do things that are wrong
2) Racism is wrong
By calling his preference racist, he takes that as calling it wrong, making him a bad person, and thus also imploring him to change his preferences. As the only way to examine this is to examine the results of his preferences, you are essentially asking him to change the ways he expresses these preferences. Therefore, he is being asked to date those he finds unattractive (being those outside his race) and thus if you are one among the population being sought by relationship seekers, you are expressing something that paints you as entitled, as you are imploring people to hold your state in higher regards than their own, as you are asking him to abandon his preferences, but not the sought's.

I do this as I hold doubts that he will fulfill your request.

Right, however, that's not even what I'm addressing; at all.

You're right he is understanding this and I perhaps didn't see it. However that was not my argument. Holding a race value doesn't make him a wrong person. It merely makes his preference built upon racist logic, but it doesn't make him a racist or a bad person.

Basically, awareness of one's decisions and the rationale one is making them is what I am arguing, not whether a person is wrong in holding these assertions or not. It happens, there's preferences because of all kinds of reasons, and that's normal. I admit I have flaws myself in logic, and I get that; however, my flaws in logic don't make me a bad person in and of itself, they just make me ignorant of my own biases, which is perfectly normal and as I get older and more mature I realize the biases of my own arguments, which, again is normal.

I sincerely doubt he looks at it that way though.

If anything, what makes him a "bad person" is the insistence to deny racism when his time would be better spent accepting it and providing insight as to how it affects society and how it should be addressed.