• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Sexual Preferences and Racism

Status
Not open for further replies.

brainchild

Banned
May 12, 2015
4,116
0
0
There is literally nothing circular, you're arguimg biological that does not exist nor would be supported as a causation for the phenomina we see in western culture. And you also do not understand anything about psychology or research methods given you are arguing things that any bachelor degree psychology student would account for in experimentation let alone fully educated publishing researchers.

You are arguimg feelings here and throwing away science because no scientist would ever touch the idea that race based discrimination at the biological level (which exiet to some degree) could ever be meaningful against the observed trends in modern day life and the piles of psychological data that imply this is largely social.

I'm not even trying to be mean but what you arguimg is exactly the enemy of progress in the field. You can't play off psychological studies to point to biology that would never argue explanatoons for the tremd we see in society. This has very little root in biology.

It's circular because we're going in circles. I can already see this. Our arguments have not changed nor evolved. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm an avid proponent to science, and I can tell you that the scientific community largely sides with my opinion about the problems with psychology. It's definitely one of the softer sciences, and not without good reason. I'm nearly infinitely more comfortable with conclusion based on biological evidence than I am with psychology evidence. Psychology doesn't hold up as well against the scientific method, due to its very nature, which isn't even debatable.

Our attractions aren't so digital. Every race has a diverse set of physical characteristics. To say you do not like 100% of a race because you don't like some of the characteristics is lotting all people of a race to have those characteristics. This isn't an innocent "oh I just don't like big lips/noses, sorry" thing. This is viewing a race as innately unattractive because they are a particular race.

If the argument is due to the conceptual ambiguity of race, them I concede my argument. If a single race can be virtually anyone, then sure, excluding an entire race for consideration regarding sexual attraction is racist. Of course, my original argument was in reference to the appearance of race (with specific features in mind), but I have no problem ceding that if what you're saying is actually what the argument in this thread is about.
 

Gotdatmoney

Member
May 5, 2014
9,911
2
0
It's circular because we're going in circles. I can already see this. Our arguments have not changed nor evolved. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm an avid proponent to science, and I can tell you that the scientific community largely sides with my opinion about the problems with psychology. It's definitely one of the softer sciences, and not without good reason. I'm nearly infinitely more comfortable with conclusion based on biological evidence than I am with psychology evidence. Psychology doesn't hold up as well against the scientific method, due to its very nature, which isn't even .

The sciemtific community does not believe the trends in north american daing and race relations are proved by biological . You keep sayimg this but you are.flat out wrong. Psychology is pseudo science and it is not perfect nor would I ever imply that it is. But you are arguimg none sense and psychology is far more accurate and closer to explaining this concept than biological. Racism is a social concept, not a biological one.

That isnt agree to disagree. You are not arguing anything supported by cell or DNA based biology. You are making shit up. There is no scientific method that explains what we are seeing in the world with regards to this trend which is why pyschology is all we have. Like I said, you dont seem to be knowledgable on either science based on the claims you are making. Show me because there is no biological explanation I have ever heard peddled with any bit of relevance that can explain how across all races in a heterogenous community will gravitate towards a white ethnicity but yet in a homogenous community that does not happen. Unless you are proposing that biology has set European beauty standards nas preferable this really is not explainable by biology "yet"
 

User 73706

Banned
Aug 3, 2010
20,489
1
0
26
Mary Esther, FL
Yes, liking a penis or vagina does have fundamental implications rooted in biology, but they aren't the only factors that contribute to sexual attraction. If you have trouble understanding this, rest assured that the internet is at your disposal and is rife with information regarding the complexity of sexual attraction. I'm positive you'll find it elucidating.

All physical stimuli is superficial, so I'm not really sure why that's such a point of contention for you. If you're sexually attracted to a penis or vagina, it isn't because of how profound you find it be on an intellectual level, it's because you're brain physiologically responds to it in a sexual way. There are other forms of stimuli that elicit similar responses, like the physical characteristics I discussed earlier, including a person's race.

Anyway, let me be clear in saying that I'm not saying that racism isn't a factor for some people. Clearly, that seems to be the case. The problem arises when that becomes a foregone conclusion for anyone whose sexual preference involves racial discrimination. What you need to understand is that discrimination isn't an inherently bad behavior, and is quite necessary for humans in many circumstances, so it shouldn't be conflated with racism, because objectively speaking, they aren't the same thing.

As for why there's a disproportionate amount of racial discrimination against black features in diverse regions compared to homogenous regions, my guess would be an inconsistency amongst the sample groups. Perhaps there were more racists in the diverse groups than in the homogenous groups. The point is that we don't know for sure, so it's best to not definitively conclude that people are racist when the statistics weren't even properly controlled to eliminate other possibilities.

"It's not that sexual preferences are racist, it's that people keep conflating racism racism and race racism, and racist people with racist preferences are getting unfairly condemned for what's an ordinary part of biology and human psychology (unless we're talking about data taken outside of the US, in which case you've got me)."
 

CrushDance

Banned
Sep 9, 2006
15,027
0
0
Why not do this test?

A man and a woman go on a blind date. They meet each other and talk between a curtain so that neither one can see the other. They talk for about an hour and both get along with each other very well and both initially feel that they want to date the other person. The curtain is then removed so that their appearances are revealed. Assume that both people are attractive in the kind of way that most people would find attractive. This is a subjective feeling, but there are many "attractive traits" that people can have that are more objectively considered attractive to human sensibilities. If one person then says "oh I didn't know you were X race. Sorry, I don't date X people. I just don't find them attractive", is that person racist?

There's no need to do this test even, most black people especially already know this is how it shakes out. You can get along great with someone but there will be that blockage if you want to take it further. And that's what's so frustrating about trying to explain this to people, because other people will always say "well that's just preference though...", while not understanding the layers of racial prejudice underneath it that builds up.
 

Dice//

Banned
Jan 24, 2013
6,357
4
400
Canada
dice9633.deviantart.com
Are you all actually arguing with someone who uses this classic throwaway line?

This is not about me knowing more than anyone else. It's basic logic.

And then immediately tries to say "well we're going in circles, let's stop here!" I'm pretty sure s/he's used other classic zingers like "it's just common sense!" or deals in other absolutes like "all of _____ can be explained by ____!".

There's no need to do this test even, most black people especially already know this is how it shakes out. You can get along great with someone but there will be that blockage if you want to take it further. And that's what's so frustrating about trying to explain this to people, because other people will always say "well that's just preference though...", while not understanding the layers of racial prejudice underneath it that builds up.

Yes. There's way more history and a lot more going on because of social norms that create this problem, not biology, psychology, or whatever the heck else. Maybe a LITTLE, but hardly enough.

Personally, I always found it a little odd when my non-Asian buddy says "man Asian girls are hot". It's sweet in some way, but in another... I dunno, I always felt that if you knew WHY you loved someone, you don't really or totally love them as much as you found a feature you were looking for. Sorry if that's weird.
 

Two Words

Member
May 8, 2014
17,043
4
505
Who and what you find physically attractive is not only a matter of aesthetics. Often times particular features trigger particular thoughts and feelings. I forget the name of that exercise that blatantly shows that people have more negative thoughts after looking at photos of black people vs white people and other races. These feelings are not always so pronounced and may feel more like subtle suggestions. There is a good chance that if you believe a particular race is unattractive that some of that issue is at play.
 

Two Words

Member
May 8, 2014
17,043
4
505
What if the person wants to raise their child with a person of similar culture?
That would be culturism I suppose. But wanting to maintain a culture and heritage seems a bit more noble than wanting to keep your bloodline racially pure.
 

sphagnum

Banned
Oct 26, 2009
14,213
0
0
What if the person wants to raise their child with a person of similar culture?

Well, that gets into questions of why you want to do that or if you consider whatever the other culture is "inferior" and where that feeling stems from, etc. Certainly not genetic though.
 

CrushDance

Banned
Sep 9, 2006
15,027
0
0
What if the person wants to raise their child with a person of similar culture?

This one doesn't work either considering the majority of people are well mashed together in western society. You all watch the same movies, listen to the same musicians, eat the same foods, experience the same bullshit festivals, etc. Hell, going back to black people again; they've been in America for freaking ever, how come they're still pushed to the outskirts? it's a desire not to be inclusive, despite what people say about "melting pots". The vast majority of people still cling to their own, but in the context of mixed relationships and race? White people come out on top. That's not a coincidence.

Edit: I think people are also overlooking the blatant racism from people who do this. Yes, it's racism to literally say "I don't fuck with any rice, curry or charcoal". That is something that someone who views themself in a position of power says to cut down someone else and remind them of their position, and that they are not "lowering" themselves to reach the bottom of the so called barrell. And it is doubly more worrying when freaking minorities say this about their own kind.
 

Dice//

Banned
Jan 24, 2013
6,357
4
400
Canada
dice9633.deviantart.com
What if the person wants to raise their child with a person of similar culture?

Well, for example, Idris Elba is a UK citizen, he's from there, he's got "British culture" in him, he's got the accent, he lives there, it's his 'home', even though he's got ancestral roots in another part of the world. :p Wouldn't that technically meet the criteria too?
 

entremet

Member
Dec 6, 2008
85,707
385
1,455
This one doesn't work either considering the majority of people are well mashed together in western society. You all watch the same movies, listen to the same musicians, eat the same foods, experience the same bullshit festivals, etc. Hell, going back to black people again; they've been in America for freaking ever, how come they're still pushed to the outskirts? it's a desire not to be inclusive, despite what people say about "melting pots". The vast majority of people still cling to their own, but in the context of mixed relationships and race? White people come out on top. That's not a coincidence.

This is plainly not true.

Culture is way more nuanced than movies and media.

Again, using American Jews as an example. They're Westernized, but many still prefer coupling up with other Jews.
 

brainchild

Banned
May 12, 2015
4,116
0
0
The sciemtific community does not believe the trends in north american daing and race relations are proved by biological . You keep sayimg this but you are.flat out wrong. Psychology is pseudo science and it is not perfect nor would I ever imply that it is. But you are arguimg none sense and psychology is far more accurate and closer to explaining this concept than biological. Racism is a social concept, not a biological one.

That isnt agree to disagree. You are not arguing anything supported by cell or DNA basedbiology. You are making shit up. There is no scientific method that explains what we are seeing in the world with regards to this trend which is why pyschology is all we have. Like I said, you dont seem to be knowledgable on either science based on the claims you are making.

In case you haven't been paying attention, I have already conditionally ceded this argument on the basis that the exclusion of a race from sexual selection is based on the abstraction of race rather than the appearance of race with specific identity markers.

In other words, if a person says, 'no Asians', and by 'Asian' they're just referring to anyone with Asian DNA regardless of how they look, then I would say that's racist. I've already made it clear before, that actual racism isn't caused by genetic factors and is formed from social constructs. I never argued otherwise so I'm not sure what you're why you keep bringing up that argument.

Now, if it had been a case where 'no Asians' meant that the person is not attracted to people who appear to be Asian due to their slanted/almond eye shape, while certainly a form of racial discrimination, it would not be the same thing as racism. And yes, biology DOES play a part in this kind of discrimination, as it is just a predisposition for certain physical traits that inform one's sexual preference.

The problem is my arguments were framed around the latter example, when the argument in this thread is framed around the former. At any rate, now that we're on the same page, I am conceding my argument, as it serves no purpose for this discussion other than derailment.
 

CrushDance

Banned
Sep 9, 2006
15,027
0
0
This is plainly not true.

Culture is way more nuanced than movies and media.

Again, using American Jews as an example. They're Westernized, but many still prefer coupling up with other Jews.

No. A lot of immigrant parents want their kids to blend in and not stand out. I speak from the perspective of black parents who specifically tell their children to "dress right", "speak right", and in all intents and purposes, "be white" as they can. They give them white names so that they resumes don't get thrown out, they send them to white schools so that they can "get good education", etc. Yes culture can be more nuanced, but when you grow up surrounded by white people and whiteness; going to the same places, doing the same things, dressing the same way, speaking the same way, believing in the same God, sharing the same cultural ticks and norms, there is very little excuse to use the "culture" deflection.

You bring up Jews as a way to dismiss this, not realizing that Jews are a very small subset of the population and that the majority of white people in North America are a mixture of many things and do not hold any serious tenant such as Judaism central to their lives. Black people go to Church more than any other group, including whites. So please tell me exactly what white people do or hold differently than blacks.
 

Two Words

Member
May 8, 2014
17,043
4
505
In case you haven't been paying attention, I have already conditionally ceded this argument on the basis that the exclusion of a race from sexual selection is based on the abstraction of race rather than the appearance of race with specific identity markers.

In other words, if a person says, 'no Asians', and by 'Asian' they're just referring to anyone with Asian DNA regardless of how they look, then I would say that's racist. I've already made it clear before, that actual racism isn't caused by genetic factors and is formed from social constructs. I never argued otherwise so I'm not sure what you're why you keep bringing up that argument.

Now, if it had been a case where 'no Asians' meant that the person is not attracted to people who appear to be Asian due to their slanted/almond eye shape, while certainly a form of racial discrimination, it would not be the same thing as racism. And yes, biology DOES play a part in this kind of discrimination, as it is just a predisposition for certain physical traits that inform one's sexual preference.

The problem is my arguments were framed around the latter example, when the argument in this thread is framed around the former. At any rate, now that we're on the same page, I am conceding my argument, as it serves no purpose for this discussion other than derailment.
I find it hard to believe that somebody would outright refuse to date somebody because of the shape of their eyes. If the person said "I just hate that shape or eyes and I don't want to have to always look at them", I would strongly feel that their disdain for that aspect of Asian people is rooted in some disdain of Asian people in general.
 

Dice//

Banned
Jan 24, 2013
6,357
4
400
Canada
dice9633.deviantart.com
I find it hard to believe that somebody would outright refuse to date somebody because of the shape of their eyes. If the person said "I just hate that shape or eyes and I don't want to have to always look at them", I would strongly feel that their disdain for that aspect of Asian people is rooted in some disdain of Asian people in general.

Haha yeah that's just being picky by that point if you otherwise genuinely like the person you're with but "can't stand their eye shape". In which case I think that's an individual's problem for caring too much about physical appearance and could probably be transferred even if that person was dating the same race and simply 'didn't like the look of someone'.
 

User 73706

Banned
Aug 3, 2010
20,489
1
0
26
Mary Esther, FL
Well, for example, Idris Elba is a UK citizen, he's from there, he's got "British culture" in him, he's got the accent, he lives there, it's his 'home', even though he's got ancestral roots in another part of the world. :p Wouldn't that technically meet the criteria too?

Still too street to be Bond, though.
 

brainchild

Banned
May 12, 2015
4,116
0
0
Are you all actually arguing with someone who uses this classic throwaway line?



And then immediately tries to say "well we're going in circles, let's stop here!" I'm pretty sure s/he's used other classic zingers like "it's just common sense!" or deals in other absolutes like "all of _____ can be explained by ____!".

I could do without the ad hominems. Not to mention this is a gross misrepresentation of my argumentation.

What you quoted from me was a superfluous extension to a statement of mine that preceded it. It was not the crux of my argument. If you actually read my posts, you'd see that I've laid out my arguments quite explicitly; zingers needn't apply.
 

Gotdatmoney

Member
May 5, 2014
9,911
2
0
In case you haven't been paying attention, I have already conditionally ceded this argument on the basis that the exclusion of a race from sexual selection is based on the abstraction of race rather than the appearance of race with specific identity markers.

In other words, if a person says, 'no Asians', and by 'Asian' they're just referring to anyone with Asian DNA regardless of how they look, then I would say that's racist. I've already made it clear before, that actual racism isn't caused by genetic factors and is formed from social constructs. I never argued otherwise so I'm not sure what you're why you keep bringing up that argument.

Now, if it had been a case where 'no Asians' meant that the person is not attracted to people who appear to be Asian due to their slanted/almond eye shape, while certainly a form of racial discrimination, it would not be the same thing as racism. And yes, biology DOES play a part in this kind of discrimination, as it is just a predisposition for certain physical traits that inform one's sexual preference.

The problem is my arguments were framed around the latter example, when the argument in this thread is framed around the former. At any rate, now that we're on the same page, I am conceding my argument, as it serves no purpose for this discussion other than derailment.

I understand what you are arguing. Its just wrong and not a phenomina that has any relevant base in biology. Unless you wanna start linking articles you are peddling bullshit. Nothing about physical traits in themselves has observable gravitation in regards to race. There is nothing that says the way asian eyes generally form preposition white women from finding them stimulating. That is bullshit not validated by any biology I have ever read. Its not consistent with any observable facts on planet earth. Again do tell where you got this data from.
 

Dice//

Banned
Jan 24, 2013
6,357
4
400
Canada
dice9633.deviantart.com
Still too street to be Bond, though.

Oh man... You know what, I agree he shouldn't be Bond, yet. People had enough trouble dealing with a "blonde Bond" when Daniel Craig was first announced, I'm sure the older generation would revolt if they made him black...
*smh* : /

I could do without the ad hominems. Not to mention this is a gross misrepresentation of my argumentation.

What you quoted from me was a superfluous extension to a statement of mine that preceded it. It was not the crux of my argument. If you actually read my posts, you'd see that I've laid out my arguments quite explicitly; zingers needn't apply.

My last response to Two World's response of you pretty much sums it up then: I don't agree with you, many have already responded to you why they disagree with you, I was just trying to "save ink", so to speak. You were also throwing around many 'scientific facts' without many articles to show for it. So yeah when I call you out for saying "It's just common sense!!!" my spidey senses go off that you're tossing in opinion for fact.
 

brainchild

Banned
May 12, 2015
4,116
0
0
I find it hard to believe that somebody would outright refuse to date somebody because of the shape of their eyes. If the person said "I just hate that shape or eyes and I don't want to have to always look at them", I would strongly feel that their disdain for that aspect of Asian people is rooted in some disdain of Asian people in general.

Again, there needs to be a distinction between 'willing to date' and 'being sexually attracted to'. If they're not willing to date them because they're not sexually attracted to them, then I don't see what's so hard to believe about that. Unless you mean that you find it hard to believe that people can be unattracted to people with almond shaped eyes, to which I can confidently say that it is true regardless of how hard it is for you to believe. Many physical traits can be a turn-off to people (behaviors too), and when that happens, sexual attraction is difficult to stimulate.
 

number47

Member
Mar 9, 2010
3,781
0
0
Well, for example, Idris Elba is a UK citizen, he's from there, he's got "British culture" in him, he's got the accent, he lives there, it's his 'home', even though he's got ancestral roots in another part of the world. :p Wouldn't that technically meet the criteria too?
Yeah totally. Biscuits and scones. Respect for the queen. I think I'm just stereotyping at this point. Which proves everyone doesn't know every culture correctly. But you can't complain about morons online dating with shallow lazy attempts at filtering their preferences.

So double checking. It's bad to say no x But its OK to say no flat butt x.
 

Dice//

Banned
Jan 24, 2013
6,357
4
400
Canada
dice9633.deviantart.com
Again, there needs to be a distinction between 'willing to date' and 'being sexually attracted to'. If they're not willing to date them because they're not sexually attracted to them, then I don't see what's so hard to believe about that. Unless you mean that you find it hard to believe that people can be unattracted to people with almond shaped eyes, to which I can confidently say that it is true regardless of how hard it is for you to believe. Many physical traits can be a turn-off to people (behaviors too), and when that happens, sexual attraction is difficult to stimulate.

Again, that pickiness likely means you wouldn't date someone you find "unattractive" (to whatever subjective preferences you have) even within your own race. To say you don't like ALL Asians for a particular type of eye is, in my opinion at the VERY least, a warning bell that you might have racist tendencies about dating someone.
 

Gotdatmoney

Member
May 5, 2014
9,911
2
0
What if the person wants to raise their child with a person of similar culture?

That is more a factor of social conditioning than anything else. The cultuee you belong to is not determinant by race and culture has the ability to grow and evolve. People would be far less concerned about it if society and people in general weren't so concerned with race.
 

Clefargle

Member
Dec 3, 2012
8,938
6
640
Huntsville, AL / The Netherlands
I think it's racist because no one has ever seen everyone from every race. They are making assumptions based on stereotypes when they say "no ____'s". That is by definition racist. How do they know they aren't into black women? Have they met them all?
 

number47

Member
Mar 9, 2010
3,781
0
0
That is more a factor of social conditioning than anything else. The cultuee you belong to is not determinant by race and culture has the ability to grow and evolve. People would be far less concerned about it if society and people in general weren't so concerned with race.
Iono. Something about this doesn't see m right. Most cultures were built around race. It'd only recent has it been based on say hobbies
 

Llyranor

Member
May 17, 2006
12,169
6
1,525
I understand what you are arguing. Its just wrong and not a phenomina that has any relevant base in biology. Unless you wanna start linking articles you are peddling bullshit. Nothing about physical traits in themselves has observable gravitation in regards to race. There is nothing that says the way asian eyes generally form preposition white women from finding them stimulating. That is bullshit not validated by any biology I have ever read. Its not consistent with any observable facts on planet earth. Again do tell where you got this data from.
Maybe it's the centuries of putting down Asian physical traits, exacerbated by 3 major wars involving the West against Asian enemies last century, alongside Yellow Peril anti-communist caricaturial propaganda. That kind of societal prejudice still lingers, even if it can be more covert over time.
 

number47

Member
Mar 9, 2010
3,781
0
0
I think it's racist because no one has ever seen everyone from every race. They are making assumptions based on stereotypes when they say "no ____'s". That is by definition racist. How do they know they aren't into black women? Have they met them all?
Yeah. But I think what's missing is the opinion of non western women in this forum.
 

brainchild

Banned
May 12, 2015
4,116
0
0
I understand what you are arguing. Its just wrong and not a phenomina that has any relevant base in biology. Unless you wanna start linking articles you are peddling bullshit. Nothing about physical traits in themselves has observable gravitation in regards to race. There is nothing that says the way asian eyes generally form preposition white women from finding them stimulating. That is bullshit not validated by any biology I have ever read. Its not consistent with any observable facts on planet earth. Again do tell where you got this data from.

If you believe that I'm arguing this then you don't understand what I'm arguing. When I mention biology's role in all of this, I'm simply talking about the fact that sexual attraction is driven by a predisposition towards certain physical attributes of the human anatomy. This is determined by each individual's physiological responses, which is 100% based in biology. This is the second time I've posted my source on this

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2739403/

But you must be misunderstanding. I'm not saying there's something in the DNA that says "you find almond eyes unattractive", but that the DNA forms the building blocks for each person's physiological responses, which in combination with the subconscious mind and personality, form a person's preferences for or against physical traits.

Read the abstract from the NIH if you're really interested in learning about it, instead of spouting off the same arguments that what I'm saying has no basis in Biology.
 

Gotdatmoney

Member
May 5, 2014
9,911
2
0
Iono. Something about this doesn't see m right. Most cultures were built around race. It'd only recent has it been based on say hobbies

Most cultures were not built around race. They were built around community that were mostly one ethnicity because the world had not mixed yet.

You will gain large parts of the culture of where you were raised. Your race will mean less in you partaking in a culture that you grew up in. I don't find wanting to stay withing culture in communities that still tightly hold on to their heritage bad but that is not going to be sustainble forever in north american culture.
 

Llyranor

Member
May 17, 2006
12,169
6
1,525
Re: the cultural thing, other factors that come into play are a common language, and family acceptance/expectations. Personally, I would say I would *prefer* a partner from my culture, but that it isn't the deciding factor, and certainly not the FIRST thing I look at.

Re: not wanting to date within the same culture, I think it has to do with how one perceive one's parents/family/community. If you find your parents too controlling/conservative/traditional and don't want a partner with similar traits, it's understandable that you might want to start looking elsewhere. The problem comes when you blanket-generalize an entire race with that association. Eg. 'no asian' asians. Ruling out an asian partner (who may very well be western raised anyway) solely based on race reeks of internalized racism.
 

brainchild

Banned
May 12, 2015
4,116
0
0
Again, that pickiness likely means you wouldn't date someone you find "unattractive" (to whatever subjective preferences you have) even within your own race. To say you don't like ALL Asians for a particular type of eye is, in my opinion at the VERY least, a warning bell that you might have racist tendencies about dating someone.

As long as they're sexually attracted to Asians of different eye types, then I think it's clear that racism isn't the issue.
 

Gotdatmoney

Member
May 5, 2014
9,911
2
0
Maybe it's the centuries of putting down Asian physical traits, exacerbated by 3 major wars involving the West against Asian enemies last century, alongside Yellow Peril anti-communist caricaturial propaganda. That kind of societal prejudice still lingers, even if it can be more covert over time.

Social factors yes I agree.
 

Dice//

Banned
Jan 24, 2013
6,357
4
400
Canada
dice9633.deviantart.com
Maybe it's the centuries of putting down Asian physical traits, exacerbated by 3 major wars involving the West against Asian enemies last century, alongside Yellow Peril anti-communist caricaturial propaganda. That kind of societal prejudice still lingers, even if it can be more covert over time.

THIS. It's also unfortunate that rhetoric to avoid the social status quo about race has gotten craftier in their many ways of saying "I'm not racist but"s.
 

number47

Member
Mar 9, 2010
3,781
0
0
Most cultures were not built around race. They were built around community that were mostly one ethnicity because the world had not mixed yet.

You will gain large parts of the culture of where you were raised. Your race will mean less in you partaking in a culture that you grew up in. I don't find wanting to stay withing culture in communities that still tightly hold on to their heritage bad but that is not going to be sustainble forever in north american culture.
So its where you were raised. Maybe how too. So I'll say x-american people who want to stay in their ethnic culture to be racist. But what if its because their family won't accept them dating outside their ethnicity/race. Do you question the family too?

But I agree with the north american culture comment. The only ones I see successfully fighting is the religious folks.
 

Gotdatmoney

Member
May 5, 2014
9,911
2
0
If you believe that I'm arguing this then you don't understand what I'm arguing. When I mention biology's role in all of this, I'm simply talking about the fact that sexual attraction is driven by a predisposition towards certain physical attributes of the human anatomy. This is determined by each individual's physiological responses, which is 100% based in biology. This is the second time I've posted my source on this

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2739403/

But you must be misunderstanding. I'm not saying there's something in the DNA that says "you find almond eyes unattractive", but that the DNA forms the building blocks for each person's physiological responses, which in combination with the subconscious mind and personality, form a person's preferences for or against physical traits.

Read the abstract from the NIH if you're really interested in learning about it, instead of spouting off the same arguments that what I'm saying has no basis in Biology.

That abstract has zero to do with the discussion at hand. You will have to link the relevant parts. The abstract is talking about how men and women percieve sexual stimuli differently at the cognitive level and how men and women are affected differently by varying sexual stimuli. That has nothing to due with race based discrimination in stimuli. The abstract does not imply anything about human features and negative or positive feedback loops.

From the abstract that article is sayimg at the processing level men and women perceive differently. If that is not what the article is about it os a shitty abstract.
 

Gotdatmoney

Member
May 5, 2014
9,911
2
0
So its where you were raised. Maybe how too. So I'll say x-american people who want to stay in their ethnic culture to be racist. But what if its because their family won't accept them dating outside their ethnicity/race. Do you question the family too?

But I agree with the north american culture comment. The only ones I see successfully fighting is the religious folks.

Maybe theoretically the family would suck but I'm not naive. Its easier to stay within your own race currently. I dont find american people wanting to stay within their culture racist. I just find that with the way NA is diversifying and interacial relations are mpre accepted it will be harder to cling to the idea that race defines culture as time moves on. The average american or canadian white, black, brown or asian person will share 80% of the same culture. Unless you plan on deep relations with your heritage back home later generations will lose their preposition.
 

Pandacon

Member
Apr 26, 2013
649
0
460
So what if it's racist. When it comes to sex, people have the right to choose who they want to fuck for whatever reason. There is no affirmative action for sex, there is no equality, you can't make someone have sex with someone they don't want to.
 

User 73706

Banned
Aug 3, 2010
20,489
1
0
26
Mary Esther, FL
So its where you were raised. Maybe how too. So I'll say x-american people who want to stay in their ethnic culture to be racist. But what if its because their family won't accept them dating outside their ethnicity/race. Do you question the family too?

But I agree with the north american culture comment. The only ones I see successfully fighting is the religious folks.

Yes?
 

Dice//

Banned
Jan 24, 2013
6,357
4
400
Canada
dice9633.deviantart.com
So what if it's racist. When it comes to sex, people have the right to choose who they want to fuck for whatever reason. There is no affirmative action for sex, there is no equality, you can't make someone have sex with someone they don't want to.

Of course, but we're not talking solely about who you want to fuck and your 'freedom' to fuck who you want as much as some-other-thing may be dictating why you feel that way and it could be tied to social problems of seeing "other races" in a negative light.
 

Gotdatmoney

Member
May 5, 2014
9,911
2
0
Of course, but we're not talking solely about who you want to fuck and your 'freedom' to fuck who you want as much as some-other-thing may be dictating why you feel that way and it could be tied to social problems of seeing "other races" in a negative light.

His argumemt is the go to, "who care about the reality of why ot happens get over it". I am pretty sure no one said have sex with people you don't want to lolol.
 

LucidMomentum

Member
Apr 14, 2015
8,947
0
0
Bakersfield, CA.
www.youtube.com
Of course, but we're not talking solely about who you want to fuck and your 'freedom' to fuck who you want as much as some-other-thing may be dictating why you feel that way and it could be tied to social problems of seeing "other races" in a negative light.

Exactly. Saying "so what if it's racist" isn't a very good rebuttal to the discussion.

Rather we're asking, why is racism such a big issue in terms of dating or sexual encounters?

We're not telling you to go fuck a quota of diverse peoples, we're asking people why they feel that dismissing a whole race of people as capable sexual partners is a positive thing.
 

Llyranor

Member
May 17, 2006
12,169
6
1,525
The prevalence of double eyelid surgery in some Asian countries to attain some sort of (Western?) beauty standard is also telling. Internally identifying their natural physical traits as something inherently negative.
 

number47

Member
Mar 9, 2010
3,781
0
0
Exactly. Saying "so what if it's racist" isn't a very good rebuttal to the discussion.

Rather we're asking, why is racism such a big issue in terms of dating or sexual encounters?

We're not telling you to go fuck a quota of diverse peoples, we're asking people why they feel that dismissing a whole race of people as capable sexual partners is a positive thing.
Because they are too stupid to think for themselves so they use second hand opinions.
Or because some tie race to culture, and rather keep their traditions.(sure.)
Their families put pressure on them to not date outside their race.

Those seems like eh reasons.

Oh some races don't have traits other want. White skin is a popular one for whatever reason.
 

Damerman

Member
Jun 15, 2013
6,238
22
390
New Jersey
The prevalence of double eyelid surgery in some Asian countries to attain some sort of (Western?) beauty standard is also telling. Internally identifying their natural physical traits as something inherently negative.

*googles this*

what the fuck....I'm so tired of this shitty world
 

number47

Member
Mar 9, 2010
3,781
0
0
The prevalence of double eyelid surgery in some Asian countries to attain some sort of (Western?) beauty standard is also telling. Internally identifying their natural physical traits as something inherently negative.
Don't blame the west for cosmetic surgery. Girls want to stand out. Let them.
 

Dice//

Banned
Jan 24, 2013
6,357
4
400
Canada
dice9633.deviantart.com
Don't blame the west for cosmetic surgery. Girls want to stand out. Let them.

 

brainchild

Banned
May 12, 2015
4,116
0
0
That abstract has zero to do with the discussion at hand. You will have to link the relevant parts. The abstract is talking about how men and women percieve sexual stimuli differently at the cognitive level and how men and women are affected differently by varying sexual stimuli. That has nothing to due with race based discrimination in stimuli. The abstract does not imply anything about human features and negative or positive feedback loops.

From the abstract that article is sayimg at the processing level men and women perceive differently. If that is not what the article is about it os a shitty abstract.

The abstract is indeed about the differences between how men and women perceive visual sexual stimuli, however, their findings are very relevant to this discussion. You see, in order for them analyze the differences between the two, they had to analyze the concept of sexual attraction itself (and did this for both men and women) and how visual sexual stimuli relate to that. The abstract then goes on to explain what constitutes sexual stimulation. Essentially, many physical features of the human anatomy would fall under this kind of stimulation, as well as certain kinds of behavior. It's not explicitly about race at the DNA level, but that was never my argument. My argument has to do with physical characteristics (which may or may not indicate a certain race by virtue of a race having a variety of physical characteristics). So again, my argument isn't about excluding actual races, just people with features that are typically classified under a certain race.

It's very comprehensive, and it'll take me some time to pull all of the relevant quotes from it, but I can definitely accommodate you by doing so, in an effort to elucidate and support my argument.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.