Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, it would be like calling a woman racist because she doesn't date other women and ditto for man/men.
Right, this is totally comparable and not a dumb comparison at all. Because as we all know, liking only your own race is a hardwired sexual orientation that you just can't help. "I was born racist guys. It was tough coming out to my parents that I only liked white people, but I was strong! I have PRIDE! White pride!"
Yes, this right here looks racist. You dated a couple women from some ethnic minority and decided, based on your experiences with those individuals that all the others would be unsuitable for you, and you would never consider them again. That is a pretty severe generalization.
And to top it off you even threw in an "I'm not racist I have black friends" cliche.
You write well, so I'm guessing you are a smart guy. However, I'm going to go with Reed on this one.
Yes, I'm cliche too: "I have friends who are black ... and Hispanic ... and Asian ... and Middle Eastern (they are the most humorous of the bunch - love that accent)." *
Friends are who you go to a restaurant or on a road trip with. Race, ethnicity, and other demographics should NOT matter.
Dating, and subsequent progression, involves intimacy, such as tongues intertwining and penetration, so, I'm sorry, I get to pick the physical attributes of who I am willing to do that with.
Only in the last 10 or 20 years has this become an issue, and a comment like "Sorry, I'm not attracted to Middle Eastern chicks" (for example) now meets with disapproval from some, and can end a friendship. It is commensurate with political correctness and the "gotta love everybody" mantra in the realm of relationships, sexuality, and family constellations, sometimes for the mere sake of saying "look at me, I can flout any and all traditions."
I grew up in Los Angeles, where I was exposed to everybody and everything and wouldn't have traded that for anything, but I have never dated a girl who didn't check the caucasian box ... the only "exception" might have been someone who was Hispanic, but had a good dose of Irish or something else dilutive thrown in. No apologies. If other flavors don't evoke a response, then they don't. What are you going to do? Infuse me with Viagra intravenously?
I don't agree. I can accept that others may want to do this, but it doesn't work for me.
* My Middle Eastern friends like my imitation of a local Arab dude with his headdress in the desert with his sheep during the Gulf War who was interviewed randomly. He said "Arab against Arab ... ees no good." They laugh.
Last edited by robertpolyglot; 01-09-2013 at 11:12 AM..
matter of sexual orientation (which is generally more "hard-wired"). Different issues altogether.
You are grossly misinformed, like most people on this matter. I can't believe the crap I hear on this board but I don't know why I'm surprised, especially after spending time on the politics board.
Sexual orientation is NOT hardwired...sexuality is fluid and can and DOES change. It is psychologically and sociologically based, since genetic factors do not predict your psychological and social environment. Also, there is no gene/s or biological process that leads to homosexuality. Much research has been done on this.
I do agree that those 2 factors are not comparable, but not for the reasons you gave.
You are grossly misinformed, like most people on this matter. I can't believe the crap I hear on this board but I don't know why I'm surprised, especially after spending time on the politics board.
Sexual orientation is NOT hardwired...sexuality is fluid and can and DOES change. It is psychologically and sociologically based, since genetic factors do not predict your psychological and social environment. Also, there is no gene/s or biological process that leads to homosexuality. Much research has been done on this.
I do agree that those 2 factors are not comparable, but not for the reasons you gave.
I'm not arguing that sexual orientation is completely hardwired, hence the qualification "generally more" and the inclusion of quotation marks. Perhaps I could have been a bit more explicit with the qualification and word choice, but, yes, sexual orientation, especially in men, tends to be much more static than racial preference on the continuum of sexual attraction.
Not sure it's racist as much as it is fear of the unknown.
But it could be also conditioning (which is basically racism, right?). If you are raised by parents/guardians that held the view that races should not mix, then it could be that you will follow that credo, too.
For me personally, race would never be the reason to say no to a suitable mate.
This sounds like baiting language. Race isn't JUST skin colour, you know. It's things like history, possibly shared culture & values, way of life, acceptance amongst your own, comfort of what is known which is crucial to survival than exposing oneself to the unknown which may destroy aforementioned attributes and lead to countless of problems.
If some people do it for natural reasons then fine, but you'll never convince me that many don't do it for less than noble reasons. That goes for all races.
I don't get why some seem to guilt trip others into considering other races.
Dating, and subsequent progression, involves intimacy, such as tongues intertwining and penetration, so, I'm sorry, I get to pick the physical attributes of who I am willing to do that with.
As has been said in the thread already, it's not racist to say you prefer the physical attributes of some races over others. It's racist when you say "I would never date a black chick". See the difference? One is stating a preference, and the other is setting a strict condition--a code, if you will. I don't care who you are, I'm sure I could find examples of non-white people you'd find attractive.
@OnlyCurious - I didn't notice MrSykes's post, but thanks for calling it out. I would say that sexual orientation is malleable to some extent. To anyone who disagrees, think about the types of women/men you were attracted to at 14, and compare that to now. When you were 14, you were attracted to other 14-year-olds, but as you aged you grew to like others in your age group. At least, for most people this tends to happen. You may have a strong programmed preference but your taste also ages like a fine wine, and there is enough plasticity--I think, for someone to do a 180 in their orientation over a very long period of time.
That said, for most people it seems to be something that doesn't change much, so I would lean towards saying it's caused by epigenetic factors initially, and as the brain develops it can move away from what it was initially wired to light up for.
Nope. Dead wrong, clinically and psychologically. It's irritating conversing with people who warp facts with their bizarre ideologies.
Since you mentioned that you agreed with the notion that sexual orientation and racial preference are not comparable, give me your reasons for believing so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
