That’s 'cause it’s not a definition, it’s a condition that fits the definition:
Doesn’t believing one race to be more beautiful, or worth romantic involvement, fit that definition?
I’m not on a high horse. I know I have flaws, I just haven’t volunteered to air them. I haven’t seen many Aboriginals or Pygmies, and I have no idea what the average Samoan looks like. If I did find them generally unattractive, though, you won’t find me pointlessly sharing that.
I can only speak for myself but I can’t understand how ethnicity comes into it. Last weekend I helped a workmate setting up the sound system for an Indian classical music performance. I got talking to one of the Indian women there and she was so attractive that I’m pretty sure I came across as a gibbering idiot. I think Halle Berry would have the same effect on me.
It has nothing to do with morals - it’s human nature.
Actually yes, I thought racism was supposed to be a bad thing. But since you now had a definition that includes Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, Britney Spears and my uncle Bob, I guess it can’t be all that bad. Now where did I write I was perfect? Not that it isn’t true, mind you – I just can’t seem to find where I wrote that? Perhaps if I look closer…
Actually you’ll notice I have not given a definition so I can’t see how you can comment on my definition. When a definition is too broad to lose all meaning of course has no final answer. However, as a general rule of thumb, I’d say a definition of racism that includes the whole of humanity is a bit wide. So I’m a racist. You’re a racist. We’re all racists. How’s that good for anything? Presumably you can now explain to me whether this is worse than your misandry (for preferring to have sex with females), paedoephobic (for not being paedophilic), geatricphobic (for not finding 100 year old’s sexually attractive), hatred for dwarves (for preferring sexual partners above 1.10m), hatred for the obese (for preferring partners under 220 kilos), etc, etc.
pizzabrat: ”[…]though, you won’t find me pointlessly sharing that”
So you’re a closed racist? Is that your point?
But even your narrow definition of racism includes almost all of humanity in the past at a certain cut-off point of, say, 1960. Most people were (and are) racist; insert Pope cliche (and when have Mother Theresa, MLK, or Britney Spears ever publically shared their sexual prefences?).
That was sort of an omni-post to people who feel the need to rationalize their sexual racism just because they practice it.
Your post implied that one had to “hate” a race to be racist, rather than just perceive infieriority.
I don’t know what you mean by “How’s that good for anything?”. Are you asking what’s the point of having a word when it applies to everyone, and is thus meaningless? First of all, there’s no reason to have a dichotomy of racist (evil)/ not racist (good). If you don’t think being racial discrimination in sex is as big a deal as racial discrimination in employment, then don’t worry about it (I personally thing the former is the bigger deal, as intamacy between people is an end, while employment is just a means to an end). Second, believe it or not, but there are plenty of people who don’t have a “hiearchy of races” to which they are attracted. Third, there’s the possibility that in the future, most people won’t include race as a sexual preference, as all forms of racism become less acceptable and automatic.
Why should I explain anything? I never said I was perfect, nor have I tried to rationalize my preferences.
If I was, would there be any point in me sharing that, especially when I never come into contact with Aboriginals, Somoans, and Pygmies in any way?
No one is saying quite that. Acknowledgement of personal sexual attraction to a given race != belief that race X is more beautiful than race Y.
Another way to look at it: beauty is only a part of the gestalt of sexual attraction.
Why not share? That’s what this thread is here for. In context, such sharing should be considered OK. Surely, this topic isn’t so sensitive that it can’t ever be discussed.
Not being attracted to a given race is not a perception of inferiority, IMHO.
…
Having said that, I agree with monstro’s last paragraph above.
Pizzabrat I find it remarkably generous of you to be willing to share your opinion that Winston, myself and many others are racist, but be unwilling to share your own feelings on the topic. I may be a one-trick pony on this issue (harkening back to a long discussion with the late TVAA on the subject), but I consider a charge of racism as something to be taken seriously. Your dilution of the meaning does no one any good.
Do you honestly believe that there is anyone who finds members of all races and ethnicities equally attractive? Is this a beauty within type of thing? Once you get to know people does their appearance no longer matter to you? You seem to be stuck on the idea of inferiority as the reason one might not be sexually attracted to someone. I don’t think that has anything to do with it. I am not attracted to Asian women. I would assume this comes from a very complex set of cultural and biological characteristics that shaped my life. I would go so far as to say that the mechanics of sexual attraction is one of the great mysteries of biology.
Apparently it is. I knew someone would come in on a high horse during this discussion. Pizzabrat just filled a pre-assigned role. I honestly find it funny that one could think that having the feelings and not sharing them with others makes you better than having the feelings and admitting them.
I would say no, because
Sexual attraction is to a large extent not a conscious choice.
Even if it were, sexual attraction is a self-defining preference. If a person of given race X is unattractive to you, they just are. Discriminating against Race X for, say, a particular job is wrong, because race doesn’t matter in any meaningful way for 99.99% of jobs.
Hoever, where race DOES matter, it is legitimate to discriminate. For instance, is is perfectly correct, and is quite legal, to discriminate against a white actor if you are a Hollywood producer hiring someone to play Frederick Douglass. Every court on earth would agree that to convincingly portray Frederick Douglass it would be reasonable to only consider actors who appear to be black. It is obviously legal and ethical to only consider Catholics when admitting candidates for the Holy Orders.
An interesting comparison: it is legal, and correct, to deny a Sikh man the right to wear a turban on the job if the job requires wearing safety headgear that a turban would make impossible (Ontario Hydro won just such a court case some years back.) However, the same courts held that it was not legal for the RCMP to discriminate against Sikhs by forcing them to doff their turbans in favour of RCMP hats. The court’s reasoning, which seems logical to me, is that a hardhat, being a critical, life or death safety issue, is a necessity; a purely ceremonial headgear is not. (It did not help the RCMP’s case that British/Canadian uniform tradition includes turbans, too. In fact, the Armed Forces uniform regs have diagrams on how to properly wear a turban in uniform.)
In terms of selecting a mate, physical attractiveness IS one of the critical qualifiers. If someone is not attractive to you it’s a bona fide reason to discriminate against them for that particular purpose.
While I also feel it’s usually wrong to want your child to marry someone of the same “ethnic group,” I would suggest this is not as clear cut as you suggest. We automatically default to “white parent hates black fiancee” in our mind’s eye when the issue comes up - I know I do - but we’ve had perfectly smart, reasonable Dopers express the wish that their kids marry other Jews. There are reasons for that other than sheer racism or bigotry.
And even where it is just racism, I don’t think it’s quite the same as, say, denying someone a job based on their race. I grant people some latitude when it comes to their kids. And there’s a wide range of possible reactions - from being privately a little disappointed your kid might not have your son’s blue eyes when he gets engaged to a black girl, which isn’t a big deal, to telling him “I have no son! Begone!”, which is.
IT IS RACISM. The question is whether or not it’s WRONG. The actor-to-play-Frederick Douglass example is also an act of racism; you are discriminating against white and Asian actors on the presumption that black men are inherently better suited, by sole virtue of their race, to portraying Frederick Douglass in a realistic motion picture. It would be equally ludicrous to have Douglass played by a woman - since he was a man - or by someone who is a deaf-mute or has a bad speech impediment, since Douglass was reknowned for his amazing oratorical skills. Discriminating against whites, women, and deaf-mutes in this case IS discrimination. But in that particular case, it’s quite justified discrimination.
Morality has nothing to do with it; its biology. Sexual attraction is biological, not moral.
Jeez, there are religous nuts who want to try to get people to feel guilt for who they are biologicaly attracted to, now there are nuts on the other side of the spectrum trying to do the opposite. Its ~biological~. And yes, as we grow older, our biology changes, and so our sexuality, among many other things, changes as well.
From a male perspective, if a very sexy black woman hits on you, but you just arent attracted to her, you arent ‘racist’. Nothing to feel guilty about. If a very sexy black woman hits on you, and you pop a boner but try to hide it or pretend it isnt there and so dont respond to her simply because she is black, then you could be said to be a racist yes. But the question was about sexual attraction, not whether or not you act on it; and the proof of sexual attraction is in the boner. And boners have minds of their own, driven by biology, not morality. Theres no more reason to feel moral qualms about who you arent attracted to any more than there is about who you are attracted to, as it really isnt up to you.
First, I already said I have nothing to share. I’m so unfamiliar with Aboriginals, Pygmies, and Somoans that I have no opinion on their looks. I only asked if I hypothetically did have a negative opinion, what would be the point of me sharing. Can you tell me what the point would be?
It may not be soley up to you, but it’s not arbitrarily biological. Only base, general aspects such as sex, size, & age are biological, the rest is social, and you can deprogram social prejudice if you think it’s worth it. Do you think a person can be biologically oriented to blonde hair, even if he’s never seen blonde hair in his life? Do think an attraction to necks extended by gradual placement of rings is cultivated by some random brain chemicals in the womb. Do you think the entire nation’s biology changed so drastically decade by decade so that dramatic fashions like shapeless dresses in the 20’s and high-top fades in the early 90’s go from intoxicating to ridiculous?
PizzaBrat, I think you need to get a grip. Very few issues are as black and white as you’re making this one, and this one is less so than most!
I find darker-haired, eyed, complected folks more attractive than blonde, really light folks. Does this make me a bigot against blondes? I sure hope not, as I am EXTREMELY blonde myself - Hitler could have used me as his poster child! (appearance wise, that is)
There are a myriad of physical, social, and personal emotional factors that go in to sexual attraction, and most of them have nothing to do with evaluating people as superior or inferior. As has been pointed out already, many slave-holders really enjoyed sex with their slaves; I think it’s safe to assume they were fairly racist.
But I wanted to move on to the other issue Bippy raised: is it racist to prefer your child to marry someone of your own race. Thus far, agreement has been total that, yes, it is.
I beg to differ. I have no children, so I can only speculate, but if I had them, I would prefer to see them have fairly easy, comfortable lives. So if I had my druthers, I’d rather they be straight, rather they marry (if at all) someone whose presence would not cause some assholes to try to make their lives miserable, would rather they were good at school and went on to college and a comfortable living, lots of stuff like that! Does it mean that I would reject them for violating any of these preferences, or reject their partners if they were of another race or the same sex or had purple and green hair or whatever? Of course not! (Well, maybe the purple and green hair! 
) But anyone who wants their kids’ lives to be easier would surely prefer a same race, different sex marriage for them!
If it makes me racist or homophobic to recognize that gay people or people in mixed marriages often have harder lives than those who are straight and don’t have mixed marriages, then I guess I’m racist and/or homophobic. Pizzabrat will likely think so. Personally, I don’t think it’s racist to recognize societal reality. I don’t have to like it, and I don’t. But if I had kids, I think I’d rather they didn’t have to deal with those problems. As if I’d have any control anyway!
I’m the only one not making it a black and white issue (well, Rickjay too)! I’m being realistic regaurding the definition of racism, but I purposfully avoided any value judgements. I personally have strong opinions against all forms of racism, but I didn’t bring those opinions into this argument. I specifically said “Both are wrong only if you view racism as a bad thing.”
No, it just makes you ignorant, and one-sided. Nobody chooses a harder life. Whenever someone makes a choice, it’s because he believes the benifits outweigh the sacrifices. If somebody chooses to marry interracially, it’s because he believes he’s better off marrying his spouse than not, despite the hardships a third person like you may observe them encountering. Can’t really say the same about being gay, though, for obvious reasons.
Wow, sorry I offended you by involving myself in the discussion. You know, it’s pretty amazing what will set some people off.:rolleyes:
Yes, I’m attracted to women who look different than me (I am white). I suspect that it’s biological - diversity in the gene pool is healthy. That much is obvious. But such things are far more complex than a simple logical formula. If it were a simple proportional relationship wherein I’m more attracted to women who are more different than me, then I would be most attracted to black women; but I am not. (Ooh, I mentioned my preferences again - try not to get too bent out of shape, o.k.?) Of course there are reasons; there are reasons for everything. However, the reasons are much too complex to describe as “logical”.
I don’t find many members of my own race attractive (East Indian), does that make me racist?
And I know my own psychological motivations in this case. No woman in my family is happily married to her East Indian husband, none can divorce, and many of the ones I have met are at least marginally sexist. My first serious relationship was with an East Indian and he was no expception. My father was no exception.
I can get along with them as friends, but when I look at an East Indian guy, I rarely think “he’s sexy”, but feel a definite feeling of aversion.
There are many many reasons why we do or don’t find people attractive. If one doesn’t find a particular race attractive, it could be because they’re racist. Or it might just possibly be they have some other reason. I think the label racist is jumping to conclusions to say the least.
"and he was no expception. "
“expception”?!?
Oh aargh.
That’s why I didn’t say anything about looking like you, I theorized it had to do with level of familiarity. The average American of any race would be familiar with blacks, and contemptably so.
I pretty much wanna fuck 'em all.
I just felt like saying that
Why so contentious, pizza? Do you enjoy negative attention?
Strawman. We are talking about attraction. It is quite possible to believe a person is beautiful, yet not be sexually attracted to that person. It is also quite possible to believe a person is beautiful and at the same time not worth romantic involvement, or even not beautiful and worth romantic involvement.
What does this have to do with anything? See the examples given above of slave holders routinely engaging in relations with slaves.