Poll: Is Not Dating a Certain Race Racist?

[Musette]

Not experiencing attraction to people of a specific race is as racist as not being attracted to a certain gender is sexist. You can't help attraction, and while it's a little eyebrow raising to say "I'm not attracted to this race" because the wording is probably tying in race more than it should, it's ultimately pretty harmless in its own right.

Granted, it's possible for someone to be racist and not attracted to people of a certain race, but I'm pretty sure the opposite can happen as well. I would much prefer to work with someone who believes in equal rights and treating everyone equally while never experiencing attraction to Asian people than someone who can be attracted to anybody but advocates white supremacy or something like that.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

I don't believe in race. I find the very notion of human sub-races to be racist.

It is. That's the point. How can you not believe in race though? Black skin is black. White skin is white. And like reproduces like. We classify sub-species of plant by color of their flowers or slightly differing leaf shape, so why not the same principle with people?

Well, sub-species of plants tend to have relatively static gene pools, right? Whereas humans of once-secluded populations have been mixing for centuries or more. So human "race" tends to be more about defining people by cherry-picked aesthetic traits; usually ignoring the actual genetic history involved.

Also, "black" skin usually isn't black, and "white" skin usually isn't white. "Black" skin can be a variety of brown shades, while "white" skin can be a variety of lighter shades of brownish/orangeish/pinkish. (Imagine if all flowers that came in shades of blue or red were referred to as "purples"?)

And, at the end of the day, I find the idea of defining people by simplified and assumed genetic heritage to be entirely useless. (Being able to map actual genetic heritage within fields like genetics and medicine, however, is both infinitely more useful and infinitely more complex than referring to people as "black" or "white".)

Lastly, people are people, and plants are not people. If nothing else, I'd say that should be of emotional and philosophical relevance.

No two organisms are the same, I know that much. I don't know what you mean when you say race isn't useful, the fact that we have used it as a concept indicates its use, doesn't it? Politicians have found it useful to segregate and incite hatred, geographers and anthropologists have (in the past) used it to describe groups of peoples from different parts of the world. But you are probably talking about what you deem useful, as fitting within one side of your own value system. Which makes the classification rather pointless. I don't see any emotional or philosophical relevance anyway. We've moved from racial concepts to genetics ones as descriptor of populations, and that's a historical matter now. There's no "proper" way to define groupings of organisms, just what's in fashion according to use. Maybe something else is to come after genetics and we will then call that a better way of defining life? Who knows.

 

[Flowen]

Not quite. I'm saying there's a difference between being racist and making a racist statement. You can make a racist statement without being racist due to ignorance, laziness, or a number of other reasons. I'm saying the person saying "I'm not attracted to black people" MIGHT not be racist, but the statement itself is racist.

I got a quick question: In your opinion, is the statement "I find dark skin tone unattractive" racist?

Just to be clear, I am not trying to start a fight here or anything, I am just curious where you would draw the line. If you would find the above statement racist how would you phrase it so it would not be racist?

I'd say that's toeing the line. I'd be really cautious if someone used that around me, and I'd ask them what their definition of "dark skin tone" is.

 

[Syzygy23]

No. It's not racist. Unless preference in the looks of your mate is somehow discriminatory now. Hasn't been for thousands of years at least.

Yes it IS. Choosing or not choosing SOLELY because of RACE is the very definition of RACISM.
It's just that maybe it doesn't matter that much. He can date whoever he wants. Primitive way to go about it, but hey, it's his private life.

It only counts if it's voluntary racism. If heavily pigmented skin turns you off or does nothing for you, you can't help it, that's developmental.

 

[LetalisK]

And how is this unique from any other physical preference?

Because race is a massively broad brush and things like blue eyes or curly hair aren't nearly as massive.

What makes it broad? The number of people that do or do not have X quality? Because if that's the case, I'd say not only is it relative to the place you live, but something like eye color could actually be even broader that something like skin color.

That's true, those preferences are learned. They just don't (generally) contribute to discrimination (except in your tomboys vs classically feminine example but that's a different tangent.) in the same way that "I'm not attracted to X race" does.

I think this is where I have the problem. Racist behavior could lead to having a preference of race. I'm not disputing that. What I'm disputing is that the inverse is necessarily and absolutely true, basically making a false cause and effect. Finding Asians sexier than whites does not mean you must look down on whites and making that assumption would be too hasty. To follow up on this...

Not quite. I'm saying there's a difference between being racist and making a racist statement. You can make a racist statement without being racist due to ignorance, laziness, or a number of other reasons. I'm saying the person saying "I'm not attracted to black people" MIGHT not be racist, but the statement itself is racist.

And there is a difference between a racist statement and a racial statement. At least in this case, you can't know which it is without knowing any other context behind such a statement, as "racist-" doesn't mean drawing just any distinction between races.

 

[EboMan7x]

I'd say there's a difference to it being a preference vs. a rule... for example, I have a rule that I won't date girls that don't tip their waiters, and I have preference towards girls with nice butts. However, I have dated girls with little to no butts. Now, wordings when you don't think you're risking offending anyone are sort of unreliable, but he did say "won't." So in this particular case I think he may have been racist.

 

[Someone Depressing]

As long as it's not because of racist reasons, no.

Everybody has their preferences. You wouldn't call a bisexual peson greedy, and you wouldn't call a heterosexual or homosexual person sexist. Because that's stupid.

 

[CJ1145]

Let me make myself clear: people should be allowed to date who they want to date. That's just simple logic.

But. BUT. To all the people who voted no on this poll because they want to live in their dream world of tolerant happiness.

If the reason you are refusing to date someone is their race: that is, in fact, racist. You are making a decision about a person specifically from the observation of their race. If you decide you don't find them attractive, that's fine. Just don't try to sugarcoat it and claim it's not racist, because you don't want unsavory words associated with your choices.

See, people want to think that racism means wearing white hoods and lynching people. That's not what racism is. That's the stereotype of what racism is. Racism is when you look at a person, and the first thing you notice about them is the color of their skin. Racism is when you find one group of people more attractive than others because one has a more appealing range of colors. You follow me? Being racist is something that is so ingrained into our society we've picked up on it to some extent before we can talk. It's not something you can pretend doesn't exist. It's not something where you can say "Oh, those other people are racist, but I'm definitely not!"

You are. You really, truly are. And so am I. And so's Chet, LeVar, Rosa, and Yoshi. You imagined a specific race for each of those names in that list. Don't try and tell me you didn't.

But that's okay. We're not going to yell at you and think mean things because you notice that people look different from each other. What matters is that we recognize each other as people, regardless of the color of our skin, and give respect and friendship to one another. It's fine if you don't find a certain race attractive, just don't pretend it's not born from the same part of people that makes actual actively racially prejudiced people discriminate against others and try to deny them their basic rights. It is, those people are just worse because they allow those preconceptions to color how they interact with others, to the point that they stop treating other people like people.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Is it racist? Yes, a little.

Does it make you a racist? No.

Nobody's perfect. Or, to quote the song, "everyone's a little bit racist sometimes". So is it racist? Yes. But only a very little bit, and it doesn't make one a bad person by itself.

 

[Rex Fallout]

No. It's not racist. Unless preference in the looks of your mate is somehow discriminatory now. Hasn't been for thousands of years at least.

Yes it IS. Choosing or not choosing SOLELY because of RACE is the very definition of RACISM.
It's just that maybe it doesn't matter that much. He can date whoever he wants. Primitive way to go about it, but hey, it's his private life.

You can date whomever you wish. It isn't racist to prefer certain things more than others. I'm not going to date a woman I am not attracted to. I don't treat them differently other than that, but that doesn't make me racist if say I am not attracted to black women. I'm not going to go steady with someone I'm not attracted to just because you think I'm racist for not doing it.

This is a rather stupid argument.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

No. It's not racist. Unless preference in the looks of your mate is somehow discriminatory now. Hasn't been for thousands of years at least.

Yes it IS. Choosing or not choosing SOLELY because of RACE is the very definition of RACISM.
It's just that maybe it doesn't matter that much. He can date whoever he wants. Primitive way to go about it, but hey, it's his private life.

You can date whomever you wish.

Nobody said otherwise.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

snip

I will admit to similar preferential's, although it's mostly caucasian women I find attractive (I'm even on the fence about Jessica Alba honestly). I can't explain why other races just don't flick that switch on in my head that makes me think; 'do want'.

If I found a girl attractive however and she was of a different race, I wouldn't dismiss her because of it.

 

[thePyro_13]

The problem with these arguments is that there is a biological component to attraction based on sex. There is no biological component to attraction based on race. It's not sexism to find one sex more sexually appealing than another because it's not a conscious decision. A straight person can't will themselves to find their sex attractive, a gay person can't will themselves to find the opposite sex attractive, bisexuals can't will themselves to only find one sex attractive, and asexuals can't will themselves to find anyone attractive. It's biology. It's not learned.

Associating certain races with sexual attractiveness is learned. There is no biological component of the body that says, "Black people are hot!" There's no hormone desitocin that makes seeing Indian people cause the body to go all weak-kneed. There's no caucanoid fold in the brain that produces thoughts of "pasty and pale, never fail!" Attraction or dis-attration to particular races as opposed to attractive people in general is a learned behavior. Which is why the reasons it was learned matter. So these comparisons between race and sexual orientation just plain don't work.

What makes you think their's no biological or instinctive preference regarding race? Race is more than just skin colour, it also includes major differences in facial structure and voice. Surly you can recognise that individuals do have preference when it comes to these things.

You could extend the quoted arguments to include people with big noses or cleft chins; would discriminating attraction based on those features be wrong?

 

[Nurb]

Are gay men sexist for not dating women?

 

[Insomniac55]

If you find someone of race X physically attractive, but won't date them because they are of race X... Then yes, you are racist.

If you find the physical features typical of race X to be unattractive and thus aren't attracted to people of race X, then you are not being racist.


Personally, I would never rule out dating any particular race. However, it's much more likely that I'm going to find a Caucasian or Asian woman attractive than an African woman. That's not racist, it's just a symptom of the arbitrary way my brain judges attractiveness. However there are always going to be exceptions to such a sweeping generalisation.

 

[Easton Dark]

I'm going to keep note of this thread to know who on here knows what words mean and who doesn't.

Yes it's racist. Yes people who think it's clever to compare gender, only finding one gender date-able is sexist.

And no, none of this matters.