• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How do you define racism?

pharphis said:
Does this apply to attraction? Am I racist if I find one skin tone, hair colour, or whatever more attractive than another? If so, does it matter?

Let's not pretend that people treat those they are attracted to the same as those they find unattractive, on aggregate.

Also, aren't people on average at least a little bit racist by this definition since we all have our in-group, out-group preferences (biologically and culturally?)
Click to expand...
Nup

Just makes you shallow.

Personally need a brain as well as a bod'
 
pharphis said:
Also, aren't people on average at least a little bit racist by this definition since we all have our in-group, out-group preferences (biologically and culturally?)
Click to expand...

I have always been completed baffled at how matter factually people make that statement as if they have had an opportunity to get to know everyone else out there and confirm this assumption.

I do think it's important to draw a distinction between racial differences and cultural differences. Cultural differences tend to be things which are taught pertaining to manner of dress, behavior, speech, what is or is not considered polite, etc.

That is a whole other ball of wax compared to racism which is typically associated with a value judgement, or intelligence judgement made based solely on a person's ethnicity.

I've never seen a demonstration of this assumed racial divide that you say everyone prefers to some extent or another. I don't recall ever having a circle of friends that did not include a multitude of ethnic backgrounds. Nor have I ever met anyone that indicated any such preference in any way.

The whole world is not the same as the tiny little bit of it that you have experienced.
 
cullennz said:
Nup

Just makes you shallow.

Personally need a brain as well as a bod'
Click to expand...

I don't see how appearance-based preferences automatically make someone shallow. Or at least, isn't there some degree to this? Some things are more shallow than others? Shouldn't the word be used (or qualified to be minor) for only the most shallow behavior?

I never said anything about the brain, btw. I'm presuming almost everyone on the planet prefers long-term mates whose personality and intelligence they like. I was speaking only about appearance to raise a point.
 
Molinaro said:
I have always been completed baffled at how matter factually people make that statement as if they have had an opportunity to get to know everyone else out there and confirm this assumption.

I do think it's important to draw a distinction between racial differences and cultural differences. Cultural differences tend to be things which are taught pertaining to manner of dress, behavior, speech, what is or is not considered polite, etc.

That is a whole other ball of wax compared to racism which is typically associated with a value judgement, or intelligence judgement made based solely on a person's ethnicity.

I've never seen a demonstration of this assumed racial divide that you say everyone prefers to some extent or another. I don't recall ever having a circle of friends that did not include a multitude of ethnic backgrounds. Nor have I ever met anyone that indicated any such preference in any way.

The whole world is not the same as the tiny little bit of it that you have experienced.
Click to expand...

?

This is just what I've picked up from both evo psychologists and sociologists: people have in-group, out-group preferences which under the proposed definition I was responding to would entail that most people are racist.

I wasn't commenting on my own experience or anything like that, but in Canada, although there are other issues that contribute to this, I see natives mostly associating with natives, indians mostly associating with indians, blacks with blacks, etc.

Does this not happen in the US or other places?
 
cullennz said:
Nup

Just makes you shallow.

Personally need a brain as well as a bod'
Click to expand...

I have seen people of every race I considered very attractive and liked many who were not also. I always evaluate on the person, not the appearance of the person.
 
Also, I cheered when I first read in the late 90's that we were all descendants of a single African woman and a (a few millennia later) a single African man. I knew it would make Kluxters and other trash apoplectic and I like them that way!!!!
 
fuelair said:
Also, I cheered when I first read in the late 90's that we were all descendants of a single African woman and a (a few millennia later) a single African man. I knew it would make Kluxters and other trash apoplectic and I like them that way!!!!
Click to expand...

Or dead of course......................
 
pharphis said:
Does this apply to attraction? Am I racist if I find one skin tone, hair colour, or whatever more attractive than another? If so, does it matter?

Let's not pretend that people treat those they are attracted to the same as those they find unattractive, on aggregate.

Also, aren't people on average at least a little bit racist by this definition since we all have our in-group, out-group preferences (biologically and culturally?)
Click to expand...

Not racist per se, as in a belief that one race is superior/inferior. Preferences and tastes are likely influenced by comfort and familiarity, no? The definition you respond to I think refers to the way you might think about a person, rather than how attractive you find them.

pharphis said:
I don't see how appearance-based preferences automatically make someone shallow. Or at least, isn't there some degree to this? Some things are more shallow than others? Shouldn't the word be used (or qualified to be minor) for only the most shallow behavior?
Click to expand...

This. There's nothing shallow about finding certain physical traits attractive as long as they are not the sole criteria for evaluating a person.


pharphis said:
This is just what I've picked up from both evo psychologists and sociologists: people have in-group, out-group preferences which under the proposed definition I was responding to would entail that most people are racist.

I wasn't commenting on my own experience or anything like that, but in Canada, although there are other issues that contribute to this, I see natives mostly associating with natives, indians mostly associating with indians, blacks with blacks, etc.

Does this not happen in the US or other places?
Click to expand...

Sure, but in the States, I think people associate more by class and culture than race. Racial crossover is common, class crossover kinda rare.
 
I define racism as "ascribing traits, motivations, opinions, ideas, etc...To an identifiable group due to my perception of their racial identity".

As akin to sexism being what I just said, but gender identity instead of racial.

It isn't necessarily bad. It is a racist idea that Asians must be smart and bookish, or blacks must be good at basketball.
 
Magrat said:
I define racism as "ascribing traits, motivations, opinions, ideas, etc...To an identifiable group due to my perception of their racial identity".

As akin to sexism being what I just said, but gender identity instead of racial.

It isn't necessarily bad. It is a racist idea that Asians must be smart and bookish, or blacks must be good at basketball.
Click to expand...
Sex and race are totally different.

To compare them is slightly stupid IMHO.

And I don't think all Chinese kids are brainy or blacks can play basketball
 
psionl0 said:
One of the things you will never hear somebody say is, "I am shallow and only interested in a person's appearance".
Click to expand...
Personally on appearance.

I've met Asian, black, white women who I would have jumped into bed with faster than you can say "Abra cadabra"

If offered
 
cullennz said:
Think it's another thread.

You are actually comparing race to sex?
Click to expand...
I'd like to know why the comparison is invalid as well. Race and sex are two ways of subdividing people into groups and then making value judgements about individuals in that group based on their membership in that group. You can do it by religion, income, hair color, breast size, or any other arbitrary way of creating an in-group and an out-group.

Surely you're not saying that it's wrong to assume Blacks are lazy but it's perfectly OK to assume that women are illogical? Or vice vera?
 
CaptainHowdy said:
I'd like to know why the comparison is invalid as well. Race and sex are two ways of subdividing people into groups and then making value judgements about individuals in that group based on their membership in that group. You can do it by religion, income, hair color, breast size, or any other arbitrary way of creating an in-group and an out-group.

Surely you're not saying that it's wrong to assume Blacks are lazy but it's perfectly OK to assume that women are illogical? Or vice vera?
Click to expand...

Do you think women MMA fighters should compete with men MMA fighters?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom