Is it Racist to Not Date a Particular Race?

Author: Stronn ,

Topic's posts

Hot
Posts in total: 132
  • Reece101
    Reece101 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 531
    3
    2
    2
    Reece101 avatar
    Reece101
    --> @Stronn
    If by race you mean skin tone and not culture(s), then yeah, you’re a racist. 


  • Lemming
    Lemming avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 466
    2
    2
    3
    Lemming avatar
    Lemming
    --> @Reece101
    What about 'orange skin tones, such as Trump?
    Isn't that more colorist?
  • Reece101
    Reece101 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 531
    3
    2
    2
    Reece101 avatar
    Reece101
    --> @Lemming
    Trump has never looked good. All that’s going for him is his money and narcism. 

    I’m sure someone could pull off that level of orange who isn’t unfit and elderly. 
  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 21
    Forum posts: 2,465
    4
    5
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @Athias
    In order to eat in this society - yes - you do need to work, you could argue that one could be a child or an elderly person, perhaps as someone who is incapable of working in general. Those are the obvious outliers, but even if you didn't live in a society (which is what I'M discussing) you still need to put in labor of some sort in exchange for resources - which is, practically speaking, what work is. 

    So yes, you do indeed need to work in order to live, with the exception of the literal exceptions. The next is the argument of "neccessity" but we disagree on the extent of its necessity, I would WANT all people to be able to live without working; however, that is not the reality. You have simply asserted such as the truth without actually demonstrating it. However in order to purchase food, or home for any amount of time significantly speaking one must work. I suppose you could argue that the rich don't need to work either, then the obvious argument is that most people aren't rich enough for that to be the case. My point is, for a majority of people, working is necessary to live.

    Furthermore, yes - it is absurd, because you are trying to take ONE part of work and state that as the only bit which matters in regard to its labeling; however, that is not at all the most essential parts which make work work. Perhaps you could argue that what YOUR talking about is only defined as far as interaction; however, your discussion regarding the laws of work would clearly use the LEGAL definition of work which is: "the performance of services for which remuneration is payable." - you could argue about the interpretation of performance of service, and what payable is, but these are ESSENTIAL bits to the meaning BEHIND work.



  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 21
    Forum posts: 2,465
    4
    5
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @Athias
    You are saying: "income" and "dating" are the same - when they are very clearly - not the same. Your analogy does not work - you speak of non-sequiturs while committing a false equivalence.  That's not all though, you are also saying, that sex and race are the same - however you only defend your argument regarding work and dating - your  second-from-last response:

    "No, I "implied" no such thing. And yes, I did make a comparison using sex (not gender) because both dating and employment involve two or more parties interacting. Not to mention, I also made sure to make reference to prostitution which combines both sex and transactional interactions (e.g. employment.) Your assertion that the two cannot be compared is categorically false especially in light of escort services and pimps and ho's. But even if were to ignore those, we still could consider dating sites which involves two people employing the services of an intermediary. "Blackpeoplemeet.com" is "racist" in that their protocol involves exclusion on the basis of so-called "race."But so what?

    What if a so-called "white" parent, for example, doesn't want to hire a so-called "black" babysitter? What would/should be the protocol there?"
    Your only "defence" is that there is one section in where sex and income come into correlation; however, SEX and DATING are not necessarily the same thing. 
    Dating: "to regularly spend time with someone you have a romantic relationship with:" So - you have made a comparison that applies in a SINGLE field, SOME of the time, in other words - it is a FALSE EQUIVALENCE to compare such a thing to ALL instances of Dating. 

    As for your question: If your decision regarding a baby-sitter is RACE, then that person is being racist. To actually regulate would require a massive ramp up of babysitting websites- it would have to include professionalizing recruiting for, and dispensing of babysitters - it would probably have to do-away with citizens individually choosing baby-sitters. The best idea I have is for some kind of group for people to order the service of another, without any picture or such. Kinda like how ordering food is, you don't get to choose who does and who doesn't order your food - but that is based on the promise that each driver who comes is trained to bring you your food, so would the baby-sitters all have to be trained to take care of children.
  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 12
    Forum posts: 1,232
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Theweakeredge
    In order to eat in this society - yes - you do need to work, you could argue that one could be a child or an elderly person, perhaps as someone who is incapable of working in general.
    No, you don't. One could be a thief; one could be homeless living in a shelter; one could be an heir or heiress to a large fortune; one could fish or hunt for food, etc. I could be generous and state that I know that which you're attempting to argue, but when you flesh it out, it's a conclusion that cannot be extended with consistency.

    Those are the obvious outliers,
    No, they're really not. If one looks at the labor force participation rate, which I believe is around 60% (correct me if I'm wrong) then that would suggest that around 40% are not working. If we assume that half of those people are participating in some of illegal work (not necessarily criminal, but outside of state prescription) then that would leave at least 20% of people who are eating without working.

    you still need to put in labor of some sort in exchange for resources - which is, practically speaking, what work is. 
    Let's remember this.

    My point is, for a majority of people, working is necessary to live.
    No, your point was that working is necessary to live. If you want to change your position, that fine. But your point is somewhat diminished now that you've qualified it with "majority."

    Perhaps you could argue that what YOUR talking about is only defined as far as interaction; however, your discussion regarding the laws of work would clearly use the LEGAL definition of work which is: "the performance of services for which remuneration is payable." - you could argue about the interpretation of performance of service, and what payable is, but these are ESSENTIAL bits to the meaning BEHIND work.
    Okay, let's operate on your definition of work. Suppose I run an escort service (a.k.a. "compensated dating") and my clientele consist exclusively of so-called white men. My patrons prefer so-called white women exclusively, and the women in my service prefer so-called white men exclusively. Now the state interferes and decrees that I must employ so-called Black, Hispanic, and Asian women. Not only that, but I as well as those under my employ also cannot refuse service on the basis of so-called race.

    Let's say that a so-called Black would-be patron calls my service and requests a woman, but all I have available are three so-called White women who refuse to date or have sex with anyone other than so-called White men. Upon learning of this, the so-called Black would-be patron threatens to sue my service for discrimination. Does he have a case? Should he have a case? Should I attempt to compel them by threatening to fire them? After all, "they need to eat, too." Do I pay off the would-be so-called Black patron as recompense for discrimination? What was wrong with my operation scheme before government interference?




  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 10,170
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Athias
    Just to be clear, there are many more factors involved in selecting a partner than just comparing 23-and-me percentages.

  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 12
    Forum posts: 1,232
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Theweakeredge
    You are saying: "income" and "dating" are the same
    No, I am not.

    when they are very clearly - not the same. Your analogy does not work
    an analogy does not require a direct equivalence. It only requires an aspect of a person, action, subject etc. being compared to that of another while applying a different context. Here case in point:

    Athias giving up a carton of coconut water would be like a monkey giving up a banana. In this analogy, am I stating that I'm a monkey? No. I'm comparing my unwillingness to the alleged unwillingness of a monkey's; or conversely, I'm comparing my attachment to that of a monkey's. I'm not saying that I'm a monkey.

    Your only "defence" is that there is one section in where sex and income come into correlation; however, SEX and DATING are not necessarily the same thing. 
    Dating: "to regularly spend time with someone you have a romantic relationship with:
    No, they are not necessarily the same thing. But they aren't necessarily all that different given that "romantic relationships" are define by sexual attraction.

    As for your question: If your decision regarding a baby-sitter is RACE, then that person is being racist.
    Yes, it's racist.

    To actually regulate would require a massive ramp up of babysitting websites- it would have to include professionalizing recruiting for, and dispensing of babysitters - it would probably have to do-away with citizens individually choosing baby-sitters.
    Yes, it would be difficult--almost as difficult, or comparably difficult, to revamping one's entire workforce to accommodate quotas.

    The best idea I have is for some kind of group for people to order the service of another, without any picture or such. Kinda like how ordering food is, you don't get to choose who does and who doesn't order your food - but that is based on the promise that each driver who comes is trained to bring you your food, so would the baby-sitters all have to be trained to take care of children.
    And if the babysitter is refused at the door? What if the couple calls the service again and request a so-called White babysitter?

  • Athias
    Athias avatar
    Debates: 12
    Forum posts: 1,232
    3
    3
    8
    Athias avatar
    Athias
    --> @Greyparrot
    Just to be clear, there are many more factors involved in selecting a partner than just comparing 23-and-me percentages.

    Thus, I refer to it as "so-called Race."

  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 318
    Forum posts: 9,722
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    It's ethnocentric but not inherently racist.

    There are even neonazis and rednecks that aren't particularly racist (which is linked to superiority complex and denial of essential things and trade to other races) but instead they are ethnocentric; they just believe in 'keeping it in the race' when it comes to sex and love.

    If you would date all races except one, that's probably due either to racist attitudes or childhood trauma with someone of that race.

    I say 'racist attitudes' because racism is, in the end, a systemic issue not an individualistic approach issue. An individual can be racist in action when being violent, hiring/firing based on race, bullying so on and so forth but in selectively dating on an individual level one can't truly be racist, they can have racist attitudes.

    The reason you can't truly be racist and only be ethnocentric based on this thread's topic is because the denial of dating you as an individual isn't equivocal to denying a race equal rights and career opportunities (which are the two primary branches of racism when denied). You're not special enough or supreme enough to be something that when denied to date to another race is justifiably 'racist' in impact.
  • FourTrouble
    FourTrouble avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 109
    0
    2
    2
    FourTrouble avatar
    FourTrouble
    --> @Stronn
    If you prefer to hire white employees over blacks, it's racist. So too if you prefer to date whites over blacks.

    Yes, some people are "unintentionally" attracted to physical features that they associate with a specific race. But that's usually a cultural artifact, one you can change through increased exposure. As with foods, you can expand your palate to include items that initially induced a gag reflex. If you're young and a committed anti-racist, porn might be useful in this respect.

    But more importantly, physical features shouldn't be the only or main factor you take into account when dating. Find someone whose personality you enjoy. And the physical attraction will usually follow, if you allow it.
  • FourTrouble
    FourTrouble avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 109
    0
    2
    2
    FourTrouble avatar
    FourTrouble
    Interracial dating is one of the strongest anti-racist actions available to us. Much stronger than, say, diversity trainings.
  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 21
    Forum posts: 2,465
    4
    5
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @Athias
    Here is you - to summarize - trying to justify a broad brush by quoting outliers; furthermore - specifically - the case of escort - the DIFFERENCE is the case of the contract - which is that they have the ability to refuse anyone BECAUSE the service is talking about the agency of the women, such a thing IS NOT the case of workers - as the difference is one's autonomy and one's doing dishes, or making cakes, or selling clothes. Their is an ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCE.

    The same is the case of ROMANTIC and SEXUAL relations - I have ENTIRELY NON_SEXUAL romantic relationships. You are entirely conflating the two - but romantic feelings are feelings of pleasure from experiencing another mental company - the same is not necessarily the same for SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPs, while the two CAN intertwine, they are not ALWAYS so - see: Asexual people who have romantic relationships. 

    While you are right that they do not need to be be 1 to 1 comparisons - the THING you are comparing MUST have the same consequences for both sides of the analogy. You are comparing a hand shake to a romantic relationship, the two ENG GOALS of the social interaction are VASTLY different, thereby meaning that the two DO NOT equate. Finally, the entire "majority versus all" is negligible, as the amount of people NOT in this specific majority ARE EXTREMELY SMALL.

    Not to mention that I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, as a MAJORITY of wealthy and RICH people still do have to work in order to maintain their wealth and therefore their lives. Also... people who steal ARE working, illegally? Yeah - does that mean that they aren't working? No - of course not. You've also just agreed to some points - like denying someone on the aspect of race is racist.

    Finally - no - it doesn't mean FIRING people - it means that whenever looking for new workers you don't have a BIAS against certain people. Furthermore, the case is because they were discriminated, but the difficulty of an action does not mean that it should not be done. Which matters more, the ease of doing something for companies, or the case of people unable to find work because they are being DISCRIMINATED AGAINST, for something they have NO CONTROL over. 
  • Lemming
    Lemming avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 466
    2
    2
    3
    Lemming avatar
    Lemming
    --> @FourTrouble
    It sounds tiring for people  to be 'that inclusive.
    People have aesthetic preferences.

    Straight and Crooked teeth for example, aren't a deal breaker for me, I'd rather date a kind person with crooked teeth, than a mean person with straight teeth.
    Might be shallow of me, but I don't mind discrimination of degrees myself.
    Maybe someday skin color will be more like hair color for people's preferences of it, but there'll still be preferences.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 318
    Forum posts: 9,722
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @FourTrouble
    Denying someone employment based on their race (excluding acting opportunities where the role requires a certain racial build on the actor's face and body) is objectively racist because employment is a direct career blocking thing, they can't climb up in society fairly if they can't gain employment as easily as other races.

    Denying someone a date or monogamous relationship with you alone is, in impact, not racist if you understand what systemic racism actually is and how individuals end up perpetuating it. It's not up to you force yourself to enjoy a type you're not into my sexually and it's actually akin to asking a homosexual to be into the opposite gender if you demand that one need date and engage in sexual encounters with a race they don't want to.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 318
    Forum posts: 9,722
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @Theweakeredge
    Athias is actually correct in this thread.
  • FourTrouble
    FourTrouble avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 109
    0
    2
    2
    FourTrouble avatar
    FourTrouble
    --> @Lemming
    In other words, you don't mind racism. The problem with this view is that it causes a lot of harm to a lot of people.
  • FourTrouble
    FourTrouble avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 109
    0
    2
    2
    FourTrouble avatar
    FourTrouble
    --> @RationalMadman
    I never said this was systemic racism. This is racism that operates through individuals.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 318
    Forum posts: 9,722
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @FourTrouble
    Not really, unless it's sexism to be non-bi-non-pan-sexual (hetero, homo or asexual mainly).
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 318
    Forum posts: 9,722
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @FourTrouble
    Is it transphobic to be non-pan?
  • FourTrouble
    FourTrouble avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 109
    0
    2
    2
    FourTrouble avatar
    FourTrouble
    This is also distinguishable from sexual orientation. We're talking about "race," something that's entirely 100% a social fact. Sexual orientation is considered an immutable characteristic, fundamental to our nature. Aesthetic preferences are culturally relative and mutable.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 318
    Forum posts: 9,722
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @FourTrouble
    No it's not entirely distinguishable. There are males with personalities that are great, doesn't mean you have any right to coerce a lesbian to be open to dating him in order to prove she's openminded to males. Do you not see the resemblance?

    There are actually biases and prejudices we actively encourage people to have when dating (even legally) agism, specisism and ablism are three of the main ones.
  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 21
    Forum posts: 2,465
    4
    5
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @RationalMadman
    You can say that - but someone simply saying "Athias is correct" or "-insert name- is correct" without anything else fails to convince me of anything.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 318
    Forum posts: 9,722
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @Theweakeredge
    how is denying to date a particular race less racist than denying to date a particular gender (or sex, really, since rarely is one trans-inclusive in their sexuality if they aren't pansexual) is sexist?
  • Theweakeredge
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Debates: 21
    Forum posts: 2,465
    4
    5
    10
    Theweakeredge avatar
    Theweakeredge
    --> @RationalMadman
    Because GENDER and RACE are not equivalent. It is a false comparison