‘No Blacks’ Is Not a Sexual Preference. It's Racism.

[AngryAmish]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/09/no-blacks-is-not-a-sexual-preference-it-s-racism.html

Debates around “sexual racism,” as researchers have labeled it, are particularly heated within the gay community, although it is certainly a source of controversy in heterosexual circles as well. It is also an argument that could soon be settled by emerging sociological research.
A new Australian study published in Archives of Sexual Behavior entitled “Is Sexual Racism Really Racism?” suggests that the answer to that question is probably “yes.” Sex researchers Denton Callander, Christy Newman, and Martin Holt asked over 2,000 gay and bisexual Australian men how they felt about race and dating through an online survey. These men also completed a region-specific version of the Quick Discrimination Index (QDI), a standard survey instrument that measures attitudes on race and diversity.

After putting these two data sets together, the trend was clear: “Sexual racism… is closely associated with generic racist attitudes, which challenges the idea of racial attraction as solely a matter of personal preference.”

[arcane1]

1. It would be interesting to see if those results hold up outside of just gay/bi Australian men

[Marr]

3. I expect they'd show something similar. I read an article recently about online dating apps

and rejection rates of various groups (young, old, a variety of racial/ethnic types, etc.). Some had markedly wider acceptance, among not only their own specific group, but others. Other groups had notably higher rejection rates. IIRC, black women and asian men got the worst of it. White men and asian women got the widest selection of positive receptions.

It's an interesting topic, and while I definitely think it's racism, it's one that's also oddly hard to condemn people for. I mean, it would be awfully hard to call say, a black woman, a racist for not wanting to date white men. I've also known lots of women who wouldn't date men of certain ethnicities (specifically, the ones I knew had refused men from Mexico, and parts of the Middle East) because of the tendencies for certain attitudes towards women that they'd noted in the past from men hailing from those places.

And while generalizing such attitudes certainly seems unfair to me, we're talking about a setting where the pool is for all intents and purposes infinite, so they figured they weren't losing anything by cutting out whole swaths of the population in that way.

[Juicy_Bellows]

2. 'No gays' is not a sexual preference. It's homophobia. Nt.

EDIT - I'm not being serious.

[Xithras]

45. You know, there really are people out there who believe that.

My daughters old college roommate had that argument with me once. She said that it was inherently homophobic for straight people to refuse to date gays because "if you're excluding a whole group of people from your dating life simply because of their sexual preference, you are by definition a bigoted homophobe." She was dead serious, and she wouldn't give any credence to the idea that people have sexual preferences. For most straight men, it's a bit of a turnoff when their date has a penis. For most gay men, it's a turnoff when their date doesn't have one. She saw the very IDEA of that "preference" as inherently bigoted.

[Juicy_Bellows]

46. I think that point of view is only held by a college roommate.

It's beyond asinine and should be discarded once one mingles out in the real world.

Or not, but I wouldn't want to share the atmosphere with someone so dense.

Did she practice what she preached? Date 70 year old gay men? 50 year old lesbians that dont speak English? Somehow I am guessing not. Cheers!

[Xithras]

47. College students can believe odd things sometimes.

I could only laugh at a few of the things my old students chose to get worked up over. IMHO, it's what you get when you combine too much free time with a lot of "book knowledge" and little actual life experience.

Besides, my daughter later told me that her roommate was just pissed off because she was a lesbian, and most of the girls she was attracted to were straight and weren't interested in her. She chose to view that as a form of homophobia.

I did ask her why she wouldn't date men during the discussion, and she told me that she would but that she hadn't met any who met her "ethical, moral, social, and political standards." I very nearly challenged her on that (is a lesbian who dates men really a lesbian?) but thought better of it. I didn't want to have that argument in my house over Thanksgiving dinner.

She was a weird one though.

[treestar]

67. Yes, sounds like college kids

shooting the bull and trying things out. And those things tried don't always work out!

But that's what college is for.

[XemaSab]

4. This is a stupid test

http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1106771/Quick-Discrimination-Index

The questions are shallow and getting a "right" answer is more indicative of groupthink than genuine commitment to antiracism.

[The2ndWheel]

5. Gay racists

Who are you supposed to support there? How even?

Today more people can date whoever they want to date, out in the open, nobody bats an eye, and now that's a potential problem too. What if that white gay guy doesn't like black guys? What if a black gay guy doesn't like other black gay guys? Now eyes must be on everyone out on dates. You can't let people just date whoever they want to date. That would be crazy. Once we figure out how to solve that new issue, there will then be some new issue with dating that we haven't gotten to yet. Lesbians will have to give men a chance because we're all human beings, or, probably something we can't think of yet, because we don't know what we don't know.

Welcome to equality?

[kelliekat44]

58. Why is it difficult to think the some gays are racist? They are just like everyone else, they have

biases, some are jerks, some very compassionate, some obnoxious. They are people like everyone else. They are no worse or no better than anyone else.

[linuxman]

6. Give me a fucking break.

You can't help who you're attracted to.

[PersonNumber503602]

7. I don't think that's what they're saying is the problem

It's the wholesale write off an entire group people based solely on race. We all have our preferences, I like dark hair pale women with awesome senses of humor, and I tend to gravitate toward them (and they tend to be repelled by me) But that preference doesn't mean I will rule out anyone who doesn't fit that. In fact, I think it would be silly to do so, because I could very well end up overlooking the most beautiful darker skinned woman who has the greatest personality ever.

So I don't think anyone is saying it's racist to have a preference that you're more attracted to.

[Major Nikon]

9. Still doesn't make much sense

Some people write off entire groups of people based on all sorts of things like height, weight, hair styles, tattoos, piercings, shape, on and on it goes, because just as people find things their more attractive to so it goes to reason there's things they are not. Just because someone is shallow, doesn't mean they are racist.

[PersonNumber503602]

13. Valid points.

I guess the question is if race is a special/unique trait that makes it different than the other ones. One thing that stands out is that other height, most those other traits are things that people have control over. Although, I doubt anyone would bat an eye if someone said "tall brown eyed guys/gals only."

I don't have an answer to my question about if there is something special/unique about, btw. I'm curious to see if anyone else does though.

[The2ndWheel]

14. Do women owe an explanation as to why they don't want to date this or that guy?

No, it's just move on dude, it ain't happening for whatever reason. Maybe a 27 year old woman doesn't like a 54 year old man because he's too old. That's clearly ageist, but nobody cares. Just go away creepy old guy.

Tough to make people like who they don't want to like. As they say, plenty of fish. If someone doesn't want to date someone else for whatever reason, outside of oh well, what else can anyone say or do? It's freedom of choice or it's not.

[PersonNumber503602]

65. They don't need an explanation. No one does.

I wasn't trying to make that argument. My question is if there is something about race that makes it different than the other attributes that people base their preferences on. I'd say it takes more to know if the reasoning is racist/bigoted ? So if someone says they don't date black men because they stereotype them as violent, or they don't date white men because they stereotype them as being racist jerks, or whatever it may be. Those sound like bigoted reasons, as opposed to "I just don't find them attractive." Which is what I think a lot of people assume is the reasoning behind some of these "no WHATEVERS."

I'm not really taking any stance on this, just exploring possible thought processes that might behind it.

[Kurska]

8. You haven't lived unless you have sampled all the flavors offered

IMHO

[Major Nikon]

11. I'm thinking there's more than 31

[romanic]

10. I never got how someone can just write off an entire race.

Kind of like how some gay guys write off "femme" guys in favor of "masc only"; it's fine if that's not what you're attracted to but that doesn't mean you should discriminate and others feel like shit either.

[vaberella]

12. That happens all the time. I'm only like if you're hot.

I don't care if you are gay, straight, male or female, or human. If you are an attractive person in my eyes, I'm attracted.

I never understood when people said they were only attracted to a particular race. That never made any damn sense to me.

[Codeine]

18. Every decision we make is discriminatory, though.

That's the nature of choosing one over another. I personally don't find blonde women attractive -- I never have, even as a kid. I'm inherently discriminatory toward blondes.

[snooper2]

41. I'll take a slightly chunky redhead over a blonde any day

[yardwork]

15. Of course it is racism.

Some gay people are racist.

Many straight people won't date outside their own ethnicities, either. In fact, as a whole, gay people are more likely to date and partner with other ethnicities than straight people are. This is probably due to sicial issues related to being an outcast minority.

[bigwillq]

16. For me, it's no whites.

Lol

I am a sexual racist!

[gollygee]

17. People always read stuff like this and think it's about complaining about individual people

There are two different questions:

1. Are the individuals who prefer to date people of only one race (or who exclude one race) racist?

2. Is our society racist in that we make race such an important factor in who we are willing to date?

Read it from the perspective of question #2 instead of question #1. (That isn't to the OP but to others in the thread.)

[The2ndWheel]

19. Individuals make up society

Where does the line end? Should everyone in society date whoever asks them out, without saying no, for whatever reasons, simply because we're all human, and you never know what you might be missing? Should women have to go out with the guy that repeatedly asks her out, even though she repeatedly tells him no, because he might actually be a nice guy? Should gay men be forced to go out with other gay men that they don't want to go out with? Which I guess is really only a question you could ask in 2015.

We're trying to build a global civilization where everyone has freedom of choice. Yet if people use that freedom of choice the wrong way, it's some sort of ism, or they're some sort of an ist. You either have the freedom to choose who you want to spend time with, or you don't have that freedom.

[gollygee]

21. You're still thinking individually instead of collectively

It isn't asking if people are good or bad, but instead, what about our society makes us think and feel like that? What causes this to be something we feel a need to make a choice about, rather than the difference between someone with blue eyes or brown eyes? Why does it make such a difference in our society? That isn't an attempt to curtail freedom. It's only an attempt to understand who we are and why we are this way.

[The2ndWheel]

24. I guess my guess would be that so many different people living together is

still relatively new. If you're more likely to get together with like minded people, then you would probably be more likely to be attracted to people that look more like you. Or at the very least, have more interaction with people that look more like you, thus having a greater chance of meeting people that look more like you, and so having a greater opportunity to date people that look more like you.

We're a tribal species. Social, but nevertheless tribal. We group ourselves into smaller and smaller units all the time. Look at politics. We don't really like having just 2 parties. We want more parties that represent the various groups of people, since two doesn't quite cut it. Another example would be the internet. Subgroups within subgroups within subgroups, etc, etc, etc.

Everything is increasingly individualized. We used to just have a rotary phone. Simple, everyone had it, it had the same ring. Now everyone has their own personalized phone, with their own apps, etc.

What else would a dating site be? It's designed to weed out anything you don't want. It's there to get you someone specific, that fits a very narrow definition of what the individual finds most attractive. I'm sure it asks you your height, maybe your weight, eye and hair color, in addition to race. Why are there black dating sites? Why are there Jewish dating sites? Christian dating sites. Farmer dating sites.

Who are we? Beings with individual preferences. Why are we that way? Modern society tells us to be that way. At least in some ways. Older societies would tell you who to marry, or what you could do for a job, etc, and that was that, end of story.

[gollygee]

53. This isn't just an either/or preference

It appears to clearly be a societal preference that white people are more desirable and that people of color are less desirable. Wherever it comes from, it is a racist societal preference. It isn't that one person likes this better but someone likes something else better. Almost everyone likes the same thing, and it fits within our society's white supremacy.

[Act_of_Reparation]

22. And socialization makes individuals.

It's been a while since I've last read up on the psychology of attraction, but I think you'll find that individuals' aesthetic preferences are largely shaped by those who preceded them. The individual's contribution to their conception of sexual beauty might actually be rather small.

We can't discount that, especially when we are talking about the perceived attractiveness of people of color. Throughout much of our society's history, stereotypical "black" physical features were constantly described in popular media as ugly. Conversely, features strongly associated with northern Europeans were considered the height of beauty. Essentially, popular concepts of beauty could be summarized, more or less, by the following continuum:

White------------------------------Black
______________________________

Beautiful---------------------------Ugly


When people say "I' don't find black people attractive", I will grant you that it might simply be a matter of personal taste, but I cannot discount that it is an attitude produced by hundreds of years of systemic racism. And again, this isn't an indictment of individuals so much as it is an indictment of society. Those who do not find black people attractive are not likely to change their minds any time soon; the best we can do is take a long hard look at how our popular media outlets shape our conceptions of beauty.

[The2ndWheel]

26. Right, and throughout history, gay people weren't thought of very well

either. Yet, apparently, at least some gay men around the world will have their own racial preferences in dating when given the freedom to exercise them. What does that say about society? Or human nature? Maybe one of the oppressed minorities identifies with the values of the oppressing majority, like an abused wife in relation to her husband? Maybe once a group becomes accepted, members of that group may end up showing their true colors that were suppressed while the entire group was suppressed?

[Act_of_Reparation]

43. I don't think these groups are that distinct.

People are complicated. Using myself as an example, I'll demonstrate:

I am white. I enjoy white privilege.

I am male. I enjoy male privilege.

I am middle-class. I started life from a position of privilege.

I am straight. I enjoy straight privilege.

But...

I am an atheist. When people learn I am an atheist, I become suspect.

I am childless. When people learn I do not have or want children, I become suspect.

I suffer from depression. When people learn I have a mental illness, I become suspect.



How would you describe me, then? Am I white? Am I straight? Am I middle class? Or am I an atheist? Am I voluntarily childless? Am I mentally ill? I think it would be relative to who you are. If you're black, you might see me as white. If you're gay, you might see me as straight. If you are neurotypical, you might see me as mentally ill. So on, so forth.

I could self-identify with any of these qualities. Selecting an unpopular quality, however, would not negate the privilege I enjoy as a consequence of my more popular qualities.

The short and cut of it is this: gay white men are still white men, and nothing about being gay would necessarily contradict the line of bullshit about blackness that they had been sold by their fellow whites, just as nothing about being black would necessarily contradict the line of anti-gay bullshit straights have been selling for centuries.

[GOLGO 13]

20. So because I don't find large women attractive I'm some how a fat-hater?

How strange to label a mere preference so harshly. Seems way over the top.

[LostOne4Ever]

23. Makes sense

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]There is a big difference between preference and racism.

For instance, say someone has a preference for red hair color. Would such a person say "no blondes" and "no Brunettes" on their profile? Preference just means they find it more attractive, it does not mean that they would actively discriminate against blondes and brunettes.

Saying "no blacks" is saying that skin color is so important to you with regards to your mate selection that you won't even consider them is very racist. Again, imagine if this was hair color. Someone refusing to even consider blondes probably doesn't have a preference for non-blondes as they would have bigoted opinions against people with blonde hair color.

Comparing it to sex/gender preference is disingenuous as there is a biological component that repels some people from certain genders. For instance, being repelled by both genders is pretty common in the asexual community...it is part of the reason many of us are asexual.

[hr]
That said, despite my scoring high on the test, I see a few problems with it. For instance, if one was born and raised in a racially non-diverse area, then they would have a high probability of having a racially non-diverse set of friends.

Similarly, if one has SAE/ is social phobic (or possibly have a schizoid personality) like me, then they probably can count the number of friends they have on one hand (and have fingers left over). For us, it going to be pretty common for their friends list to be anything but diverse.

I think a better question would have been would you be WILLING to become close personal friends with another race. This is, unless, of course, they mean acquaintances when they say friends. That is probably what they meant but I personally do not consider those things the same.[/font]

[kcr]

25. Every time something like this comes up, people will want to defend themselves

Rather than try to examine their "preferences". Always, it's just a matter of preference that just happened to be that way. They couldn't possibly have been affected by outside factors. Other people may be racist, sexist, shallow, whatever factor being discussed, but not them. No way. Not possible.

[jeff47]

29. Part of it is the mulitple levels involved.

Personally, I find pale skin attractive. So someone with a Northern European ancestry would be more attractive, if everything else was equal. But everything else is never equal, and it is not a strong enough attraction to "write off" other races.

So you have the level of racism where someone would "write off" a particular race, and a lot of people want to defend themselves by pointing out they would not do so.

But then you have another level of trying to figure out why that attraction is there at all. Is it because "model" women were damn near albino when I was growing up? (ex. The female leads in Disney movies were very pale until after I was an adult) That would point towards structural racism.

Is it because I've got a pretty damn pale ancestry (Scottish/Irish/English)? Is that "my ancestry" part racial bias, or does it just go back to growing up surrounded by a relatively pale family?

Since it's a visceral attraction, I don't have a specific reason why I find it attractive. That makes it very hard to figure out if it's some sort of structural racism, or just a preference along the lines of "I like Mexican food, and don't like Japanese food".

[kcr]

31. I don't think it's easy

I just think even attempting to think about it on any level is a good thing, like the way you just did. Merely dismissing it as a possibility is wrong, IMO, because of course there are outside factors that influence attraction, just as racism affects so many things.

[Silent3]

30. Reluctance for self-examination could be part of it, but "So what am I supposed to do about it?"...

...reactions drive many seemingly defensive responses. Or just sheer annoyance that someone seems to be telling others that they should feel bad about their personal preferences.

Is a person supposed to feel bad about themselves for not finding certain groups of people attractive?

Are people morally obligated to ignore their own attractions? Deliberately pursue relationships with people they don't find attractive for the express purpose of seeing if attraction will grow? (As if those times when personality wins out over appearance isn't opportunity enough.)

Do you imagine that self-examination would very often change attractions? That people will look deep into their own souls, discover something they don't like, and by force of will suddenly start finding other people attractive that weren't attractive to them before?

[kcr]

32. I don't think the point is to feel bad about yourself.

Racism exists and we're all affected by it. Being aware of it is key, not being in denial. That's the point.

[Silent3]

34. In the case of physical attraction, what is one supposed to do with that awareness?

I don't find people with green skin attractive. I realize that maybe my upbringing and the influence of society at large may have blinded me to the beauty of green-skinned people, that maybe it's not just an in-born sense of aesthetics. Yes, my lack of attraction could be the result of racism, or a form of racism itself.

I'm aware. Now what?

[kcr]

36. I don't think you're supposed to find people with green skin attractive

I think you should get them a bucket.

Now what? It's up to you. You don't have to do anything about it if you wish. If it doesn't bother you, do nothing. If it does bother you, what do you usually do when there's something about yourself that bothers you? Do that.

[Silent3]

38. My example was purely hypothetic anyway.

I have no problem with this look whatsoever.

[Prism]

27. It's definitely a problem in the gay male community

A lot of my friends are Asian and can often have a hard time dating (this is the Bay Area where there are a lot of gay asian males). Online profiles will be very upfront about "No Asians". Not only do they get that loveliness, but you'll also find that many Asians themselves refer to themselves as "non-sticky" - they won't date other Asian men.

On the flip side, if you do date Asian men, you can run the risk of being labelled a "rice queen", - a term meant derisively.

I could talk about this whole topic for days on end based on my observations and personal experience.

But yeah, it's a problem that exists.

[dorkzilla]

28. I'm not attracted to stupid people

I met my husband on match.com. while my profile had no preference, my criteria was if you couldn't string a sentence together, if you talked about the Yankees to much or if your message was "hey, you're really hot, wanna fool around?" you were dead in the water. If you spoke of your favorite authors that weren't Dan Brown, if your references to music included Django or Schubert, if you had a penchant for history, Shakespeare and science, and could converse about the Enlightenment then I found you attractive. Sadly, there aren't many of them but I got myself the sweetest nerd whoever lived.

Some if us get more turned on by grey matter than skin color.

ETA I'm a straight white woman if that matters.

[REP]

35. I met mine through an analog newspaper personal ad I ran

We talked for hours before we actually met, and I was sure he was going to be just fine no matter what he looked like barring a few deal-breakers that were non-race/height/weight related. When we finally met, it turned out he is my physical "type" and I am his - down to having his favorite female first name. 23 years last month!

[dorkzilla]

37. it's great when things turn out like that!

We also traded a lot of emails then moved on to lots of phone calls before we met, which was my M.O. and the reason why, I think, I had much more luck than my friends have had on match. They were not exactly methodical about screening their dates (get an email in the morning, arrange to meet that evening)... before I set my cap at my husband I dated quite a few really wonderful men. But again, if they're intelligent I almost always find them attractive. Plus we already had a real sense of each other by the time we met.

We are going on 9 years together. He's amazing.

[REP]

39. Congrats!

The old newspaper personals screening system was "can you dial a phone number?"

[dorkzilla]

49. damn i had this whole "Sleepless on Seattle" fantasy

i thought maybe you still had the letter i feel gyped! LOL

[REP]

51. I have a copy of the issue of The Pitchfork it was in ...

... and I still have the dude.

At the time, I was pretty embarrassed about running the ad, so I only told one person. So of course, it was The Ad of the Week and run quarter page in the center of the page and read on the radio multiple times for a week. I got hundreds of responses. I married Caller #2.

[dorkzilla]

63. awwwwww - even better than any film!!!

Great story!

[riderinthestorm]

33. The heart wants what it wants. I dated every color under the rainbow

slept with everyone of them as well.

Fell madly in love with my husband at first sight.

I think ascribing who one loves as racism is pretty silly imo.

The heart wants what it wants.

[romanic]

40. True.

But writing off entire groups of people because you don't find them "attractive" without even giving them a shot is still pretty racist.

[GummyBearz]

52. This has been the battle cry of "nice guys" for decades

Girls never want to go out with us... they always pick the dangerous guy or the douchey guy... they are bigoted against nice guys! And it must end!

[Bad Thoughts]

42. Many white masters went after their black slaves

There is some sort of weakness in the definition of racism, because there are plenty of historical examples of people who sexually used and oppressed, and were perhaps attracted to, those whom they felt they were racially superior to.

[gollygee]

54. The word you're looking for is "rape"

and people raping those they have an ownership claim to due to their race does not disprove racism at all.

[Bad Thoughts]

57. But I'm not trying to disprove racism at all

I'm trying to point out that the researchers seem to be aiming at a very narrow form of racism that focuses on revulsion when there are lots of historical examples of racism in which the individuals use racism as a tool and an ideology to dominate, socially and sexually, the other to whom they may be attracted.

[gollygee]

59. I think they were attracted because they dominated them

like the domination, the idea that they could own a woman, was sexually appealing to them. That was just who was available to own, and who was socially acceptable to rape and have other people know they were raping.

[Bad Thoughts]

64. First, the phenomenon is not limited to rape

There are plenty of examples of Native American women who willing participants in relationships with Spanish soldiers in the 16th and 17th centuries. The soldiers were themselves attracted to these women, in part because they saw them as more sexually available than Spanish women. However, the ideology of the reconquista and Euro-Christian superiority shaped those relationships in uneven, often disastrous, ways, affirming the generally attitude of Spanish domination while destabilizing indigenous society from within. There are the examples of the Freikoerpsmaenner who fought against Communists during the day, but pursued them at night.

Second, we need to acknowledge that cultural ideas can affect our notions of what a good relationship is and how to pursue one. A misogynist might well believe that the ideal woman is someone whom he can dominate. Conversely, any man might assume that in pursuing his desired woman that he must be dominant in some manner: show superior strength, superior earning power, and if he believes necessary, the ability to break her will.

I believe that there are plenty of men who find that their attractions put them at odds with their beliefs and values. It leads to unbalanced and uneasy relationships, even as far as ownership of and violence toward the objects of desire. Indeed, the difficulty in resolving the contradictions was noted as one of the leading causes of the increased violence of the Freikoerpsmaenner.

This is at the core of the problem I have with the study: it is relying on the self-reporting of these men, getting results that equate with a very narrow range of racist attitudes: publicly seeking some sort of racial exclusion that might privately reveal other dimensions.

[Xithras]

44. I'm not attracted to blondes. Preference is not bigotry.

Last edited Fri Sep 11, 2015, 04:56 PM - Edit history (2)

Redheads? Hot. Brunettes? Hot. Tall skinny blondes? They remind me of my mother, and I have no interest in boffing me own mum (or women who look like her).

We all have preferences. Some people aren't attracted to tall people. Some people aren't attracted to short people. Some find dark skin alluring. Some find pale skin exciting. Some people like their partner to have some curves. Some people are attracted the elfin waif look. Everyone has their own definition of "beautiful", and the further a person strays from that ideal, the less attraction that person experiences.

The fact that someone isn't attracted to someone else based on a physical feature doesn't make them racist or bigoted. It simply means that they have a preference for other physical traits.

So what's the difference between "preference" and "discrimination"? Simple...just ask yourself this: Is there a concealed contempt for that person based on the characteristic? Do you DISLIKE the person because they are blonde/brunette/tall/short/fat/skinny/young/old/DIFFERENT? If so, you might be a racist or a bigot. If not, you're simply expressing a preference.

Or, to put it another way:

"I like him, but I'm not attracted to {FEATURE}, so he doesn't turn me on." <--not bigoted
"That guy? Oh hell no. I don't like {FEATURE} people and don't want anything to do with them." <--bigoted

If you aren't attracted to a person based on a feature, you're simply expressing a preference. If you actually DISLIKE the person because of the feature, you are probably a racist or a bigot.

[Juicy_Bellows]

48. +100 for using the word 'boffing'! Nt.

[MosheFeingold]

50. I wondered how this article would be recieved here

I saw it yesterday. I really don't know if I have an opinion.

I think some of it are preferences, but they posters don't have enough class say so correctly, or, due to the impersonal nature of the internet impose a far greater (and sloppier) filter than they would in person.

On the other hand, I'm Jewish and a male heterosexual.

Swarthy white. I've always had a thing for the fair blue-eyed Nordic type females -- perhaps because when I was a kid in pre-WWII Europe they were off limits for many reasons. "Shiksappeal" to quote Seinfeld. They hurt me they are so pretty.

But, I married a lovely brown-eyed, dark-haired, slightly swarthy Jewish girl and she was the love of my life.

Never dated anyone that was not a lovely brown-eyed, dark-haired, slightly swarthy Jewish girl, and I probably would not, regardless of my preference, even if I wasn't long past the age where I wanted to.

Why? Because I always considered dating as a mutual interview process to marriage, and I would never marry anyone who wasn't Jewish --- both for religious reasons, and practical, in that marriage is hard, serious, business, and having that common bond makes things much easier and prevents disagreements.

My eldest son married a WASPy Nordic type (she eventually converted prior to having children), and for years she didn't feel like she fit in our rather rambunctious family, and it caused trouble in their marriage. Some religious issues, some cultural.

Of course, some 50 years later, she told me she thinks she's beginning to fit in, so perhaps people should cast their nets widely.

[gollygee]

56. You have a grown child who has been married 50 years?

Is that a typo? I'm trying to think. If your son was 20 when he married, he'd be 70 now, and if you were 20 when your son was born, you'd be 90 now.

[MosheFeingold]

60. I will be 91 Monday.

[gollygee]

61. Wow :)

Happy birthday (early!)

[MosheFeingold]

62. Thank you!

The whole clan is getting together for Rosh Hashahna. I'm pretty excited.

[Marrah_G]

66. WOW!

Happy Birthday!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[smirkymonkey]

69. It's a funny thing about attraction. I am Italo-Anglo-Dutch. For some reason I have always

been attracted to the Anglo-Irish-Scots types, with the occasional Jewish outliers. It wasn't a conscious decision, it was just that after a while I noticed a pattern of the types of men that I was attracted to - particularly the Irish for some bizarre reason.

Many women are attracted to the Mediterranean types, but I have never found them attractive. I think I have always associated swarthy types with sexism with the exception of the Jews, which is why I find them attractive. I have never found a dark haired, dark eyed man attractive in my life (unless they were Jewish). Is that racism or self-preservation? I feel like I have a better chance at being treated like a human being by a Northern European type than someone from a more sexist culture. It's not really conscious, it just is.

My Dad is full blooded Italian but I probably wouldn't date an Italian man unless he was a half breed and an exceptional case. I am just not attracted to them. All kinds of things go into attraction. I am not saying that all Northern European men are free of sexism, but they just don't seem as threatening to me as men from cultures that treat women like cattle. Sorry, it's just instinct for me and I can't undo it. I am pretty sure it will never change.

FWIW, I will never date a religious man. I will just never believe that they would value me as an equal human being, regardless of the religion.

[On the Road]

55. So Now We're Telling People Who They are Supposed to be Sexually Attracted To?

Wow.

[Quantess]

68. No we're telling people they need to lie about who they are attracted to.

Just say you are sexually attracted to 50 year old bald chinese men with big bellies, when you aren't. You won't sound racist that way.