Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sorry, attraction is hard wired. It's rediculous to say I am racist for being attracted to certain races as it is to say I am only attracted to people who are in shape, or to full hair vs bald, large vs small cheated women, fat vs thin. Gay people are born this way, as it is for body features which includes skin tone.
This. You literally do not choose who you are attracted to.
You are socialized to prefer one skin color over another.
This is proven over and over again in bias training. It's true.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Divorced white baby boomer here, who never dates white women. I was dating African-American women, but have had to stop because of the recent unpleasantness.
The recent unpleasantness? That refers to the Civil War. Didn't that kind of make interracial dating easier, at least after another century or so?
Anonymous wrote:Wow, black women are lumped in one category when we have the most varied skin tones, textures, and hair colors. Now white women are broken down in subtle nuanced ways.
Anonymous wrote:Quote from my dad who grew up in Eastern Europe during communist rule. “They would dictate where you could live, what you could wear, what you could read or what music you could listen to, but even those idiots knew not to mess with whom you could date”![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sorry, attraction is hard wired. It's rediculous to say I am racist for being attracted to certain races as it is to say I am only attracted to people who are in shape, or to full hair vs bald, large vs small cheated women, fat vs thin. Gay people are born this way, as it is for body features which includes skin tone.
This. You literally do not choose who you are attracted to.
You are socialized to prefer one skin color over another.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Divorced white baby boomer here, who never dates white women. I was dating African-American women, but have had to stop because of the recent unpleasantness.
The recent unpleasantness? That refers to the Civil War. Didn't that kind of make interracial dating easier, at least after another century or so?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sorry, attraction is hard wired. It's rediculous to say I am racist for being attracted to certain races as it is to say I am only attracted to people who are in shape, or to full hair vs bald, large vs small cheated women, fat vs thin. Gay people are born this way, as it is for body features which includes skin tone.
This. You literally do not choose who you are attracted to.
You are socialized to prefer one skin color over another.
This is proven over and over again in bias training. It's true.
LOL at the idea bias training proves anything. Everyone knows going into that you gotta say the stupid woke BS they expect you to say.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sorry, attraction is hard wired. It's rediculous to say I am racist for being attracted to certain races as it is to say I am only attracted to people who are in shape, or to full hair vs bald, large vs small cheated women, fat vs thin. Gay people are born this way, as it is for body features which includes skin tone.
This. You literally do not choose who you are attracted to.
You are socialized to prefer one skin color over another.
This is proven over and over again in bias training. It's true.
Anonymous wrote:Divorced white baby boomer here, who never dates white women. I was dating African-American women, but have had to stop because of the recent unpleasantness.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think most of us agree this whole concept is nonsense. Question is: why did the Post run this article and why are we giving it oxygen by discussing it? Sort of like the Tom Toles story. We are at fault for inflaming this
As much as I know we need to support journalism, I unsubscribed to the Post after that viscously awful Toles story, and this confirms it. Idiocracy comes to the left, after it devoured the right in 2016
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sorry, attraction is hard wired. It's rediculous to say I am racist for being attracted to certain races as it is to say I am only attracted to people who are in shape, or to full hair vs bald, large vs small cheated women, fat vs thin. Gay people are born this way, as it is for body features which includes skin tone.
This. You literally do not choose who you are attracted to.
You are socialized to prefer one skin color over another.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Sorry, attraction is hard wired. It's rediculous to say I am racist for being attracted to certain races as it is to say I am only attracted to people who are in shape, or to full hair vs bald, large vs small cheated women, fat vs thin. Gay people are born this way, as it is for body features which includes skin tone.
No, what's ridiculous (this is the proper spelling of that word, by the way) is to say that you're not attracted to Black men, for example. Because the only thing that all Black men have in common is being "Black". And maybe having a penis. But there's a vast array of different body types, height, hair types, and skin colors among Black men. Not to mention that each Black man is a unique individual, with his own personality, intellect, sense of humor, and sensitivity. To summarily dismiss "Black men" as a monolith to which you are not attracted is racist.
I summarily dismiss the same gender as me since I am not attracted to them. And I dismiss certain hair length believe it or not, even in my race. That doesn't mean I don't see all of the above as equal. I don't need to sleep with everyone to prove my what used to be considered liberal bonafide
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think most of us agree this whole concept is nonsense. Question is: why did the Post run this article and why are we giving it oxygen by discussing it? Sort of like the Tom Toles story. We are at fault for inflaming this
As much as I know we need to support journalism, I unsubscribed to the Post after that viscously awful Toles story, and this confirms it. Idiocracy comes to the left, after it devoured the right in 2016
The Post is journalism no more.
They should pay US to read their nonsense and enable their ad money.