• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are interracial couples acceptable?[ W: 330]

How do you feel about interracial couples

  • It's wrong to date and have children with other races

    Votes: 2 1.8%
  • It depends on the race

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Interracial couples and children are completely acceptable to me

    Votes: 106 93.8%
  • I have mixed feelings

    Votes: 5 4.4%

  • Total voters
    113
I said that it's acceptable. I said it should be allowed. I also said that interracial couples involving black men and white women tend to be the lowest common denominators of each group, thereby making it difficult for children. I said that the reverse (WM/BW) tend to both dip from good stock, and those kids are more likely to succeed.Do I have a problem?

Only you can answer that for yourself.

If I felt it was okay to discriminate against others because of their race, and even though I protested that I personally didn't discriminate that it was acceptable if others did so, I would conclude that I have a problem, because allowing racism to flourish in a society because it doesn't affect me and I can't be bothered by those who are affected is, in my mind, a very real problem.

You seem to disagree.
 
If any American politician won 80% of the vote, it would be considered a landslide, the second coming, a mandate.

20% doesn't qualify as "lots" in my book. :D

I disagree. If you were out with your date in a nightclub with 100 people and 20 of those people give you "the look," you would feel it's a lot.
 
I would conclude that I have a problem, because allowing racism to flourish in a society because it doesn't affect me and I can't be bothered by those who are affected is, in my mind, a very real problem.

Here is a map of racial segregation in NYC. By allowing people to choose where they wish to live you're allowing segregation to arise. You seem to be saying that you're not OK with people exercising their freedom of association when it comes to business dealings because that allows racism to be expressed, and so you support government stripping people of their right to free association. If that is your position, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, so please correct me if that's what I'm doing, then how would you feel about government stripping people of the right to choose where they live and instead manage the process by assigning you a choice of homes because this would insure that racially segregated neighborhoods cannot develop.

Segregation_zps8474ba04.jpg
 
Although it's a cute picture, your response betrays your actual ignorance. You were asked specific, objective questions, which quite frankly are typical questions that are asked when examining statistical research that is done on a population sample.

Specifically I asked the following

You can't answer that question because you don't know. There is nothing racist about that question. It is objective and has an answer. You just don't know it because you don't appear to understand how such research is conducted. And that's ok, there is nothing wrong with that. But what is wrong, is that when someone asks you questions, you respond that the person is accusing you a racism. It's total rubbish.

Next of all I pointed out the following

Dude, it's not my job to build your case for you.

Here is what we do know: I made a claim that scientific research had been conducted which supported the assertion that black females were generally found to be less attractive than those of other races. In support of this claim, a scientific study was provided which confirmed every part of my initial claim.

Unless you can provide a valid, factually derived reason why it should be viewed in any other way, that study can be considered to come from a reputable, academic source (The American Psychological Association). The study in question also consistently demonstrated that a variety of male and female observers from numerous different races in a controlled environment found black females to be, on average, less physically attractive than those of other races.

That is where my obligation to you here ends. It's not my job to prove the legitimacy of a source to you simply because you dislike what it happens to say.

If you want to argue that the study in question or its findings are invalid, the burden of proof is going to be on you to prove it. No one else.

Vague allegations of wrong doing with nothing to back them up simply aren't going to cut it.

"Maybe the sample was biased."

"Maybe the researchers conducting the study just disliked black people."

"Maybe there is no valid definition of attractiveness."

Sorry buddy, but "maybe" isn't worth of a hill of beans. Stop dropping hypotheticals, and find something to criticize which can actually be shown to be a part of the damn study, or just concede the point already.

This is freshman level stuff here.
 
Last edited:
Constructing a study that can be as comprehensive as you'd like on this issue is going to be very difficult. We'd need to start with single people and get their opinions on interracial marriage. From that large pool we'd have to track dating opportunities that were presented, then either accepted or rejected. It's at this point that we get into interesting territory. How do we determine the basis for offers of interracial dating? Was the person rejected because of individual incompatibility or because of race? It's entirely possible to reject a black man for being an ass, for being rude, etc just like with a white guy. How does the researcher determine the basis for the rejection?

Anyways I don't want to work through all of the problems, I want to say that sometimes we have to work with the best info available. It's usually better than not having any info. And then of course there is TacticalEvilDan's point that info isn't necessary - we should be satisfied with just knowing the principles people espouse.

Now we are getting somewhere. That's exactly the point. Trying to do it would be difficult and you have correctly pointed out some of the difficulties involved. But if you want to be accurate, that's the kind of thing that you do.
 
Only you can answer that for yourself.

If I felt it was okay to discriminate against others because of their race, and even though I protested that I personally didn't discriminate that it was acceptable if others did so, I would conclude that I have a problem, because allowing racism to flourish in a society because it doesn't affect me and I can't be bothered by those who are affected is, in my mind, a very real problem.

You seem to disagree.

We have legislation that creates and institutionalizes reverse racism. Racism is evident when I take a civil service exam, apply for a scholarship, apply for low income housing, and many other things.

I deal.
 
Dude, it's not my job to build your case for you.

I didn't ask you to build a case. I asked you to answer some specific, objective questions. The fact is you can't do it. But what you did do is say that I was accusing you of racism, which I never did. You are the person that's hysterical, not me.
 
Here is a map of racial segregation in NYC. By allowing people to choose where they wish to live you're allowing segregation to arise. You seem to be saying that you're not OK with people exercising their freedom of association when it comes to business dealings because that allows racism to be expressed, and so you support government stripping people of their right to free association. If that is your position, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, so please correct me if that's what I'm doing, then how would you feel about government stripping people of the right to choose where they live and instead manage the process by assigning you a choice of homes because this would insure that racially segregated neighborhoods cannot develop.

Segregation_zps8474ba04.jpg

I wasn't having a discussion with you, and the discussion I was having has nothing whatsoever to do with the nonsense you have posted. Please carry on with others, since this is my only response to you.
 
We have legislation that creates and institutionalizes reverse racism. Racism is evident when I take a civil service exam, apply for a scholarship, apply for low income housing, and many other things.

I deal.

Which is an entirely different topic, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of you supporting the rights of others to racially discriminate. But if you don't wish to continue that discussion, I'll be happy to drop it.
 
Now we are getting somewhere. That's exactly the point. Trying to do it would be difficult and you have correctly pointed out some of the difficulties involved. But if you want to be accurate, that's the kind of thing that you do.

I read a crapton of studies. I haven't seen anything like that pass my desk. This now leaves you with the choice of flying by the seat of your pants or using imperfect information to try to develop a more nuanced understanding of what's going on. I say make use of what you can find.
 
I read a crapton of studies. I haven't seen anything like that pass my desk. This now leaves you with the choice of flying by the seat of your pants or using imperfect information to try to develop a more nuanced understanding of what's going on. I say make use of what you can find.

My response is that you can do that, but if you do, you should make it clear that it's imperfect and that it may not be an accurate reflection of reality.
 
Totally butting in here. Just out of curiosity (sincerely) what would other reasons be?

You might have missed my earlier post that spurred that whole exchange with Agent J.... but, in a nutshell: I answered the OP that I myself have dated women of other races (I'm white, by the way), and when I see a white man with a woman of another race, I think "good for him."

When I see a white woman with a man of another race, though, my initial gut reaction is negative. Also, I typically assume that there's something wrong with her: maybe she has a bad reputation, maybe she has an STD, maybe she's really awkward and doesn't have any friends, something like that.

I admitted that my negative gut reaction to seeing white women with men of other races was not something I decided on consciously, so I'm not really sure what the reason for it is.

Like I said, maybe I am a racist and just don't realize it.

However, I happen to believe it's something else. I think I get the most pleasure out of seeing couples where the man reminds me of myself, and the least pleasure out of seeing couples where the man is very different from me. For example, if I see a beautiful woman with an older man, I get a negative gut reaction. If I see a beautiful woman with a very short man, I get a negative reaction. If I see a woman with a foreign man (regardless of race), I get a negative gut reaction. If I see a beautiful woman with a man who looks/sounds like me, I literally feel joy.

I would say it comes down to me having an enormous ego and wanting every beautiful woman in the world to fawn over me, and no other man. Ego and sexual possessiveness.

I suppose I see men of other races as dissimilar to myself. One exception, though: my friends who are black and asian - if they date white women I'm legitimately happy for them. I want the people in my circle to have the very best things in life and if that's what makes them happy, I wish it for them.
 
I didn't ask you to build a case. I asked you to answer some specific, objective questions.

I have absolutely no obligation to answer them. Unless you can provide a single valid reason why the source in question should be considered to invalid, the simple fact of the matter is that it holds more credibility than you do.

It gets the benefit of the doubt here. Your baseless allegations of unproven wrong doing do not.

The answer to every question you could possibly want to ask here is contained within the study itself, the link to which I have already provided.

I would suggest you get to work if you want to make your case against it.
 
I have absolutely no obligation to answer them. Unless you can provide a single valid reason why the source in question should be considered to invalid, the simple fact of the matter is that it holds more credibility than you do.

You are not obligated to answer and that's a good thing for you because you don't know the answer. And any person who knows anything about it would agree that the fact that you can't answer is a reason to look at the research as suspect.
 
Personally, I find this whole discussion strange, because I'm attracted to what I'm attracted too. It's not quantifiable as race but more from chemistry, personalty and character. I'm not sure I could control it if I wanted to.
 
My response is that you can do that, but if you do, you should make it clear that it's imperfect and that it may not be an accurate reflection of reality.

You're not saying that to people who just post opinions, which would include you. Having data gives us something objective to analyze when compared to competing opinions. This automatically elevates the content to be a better reflection of reality than just mere opinion. As Gathomas88 is arguing, the ball is now in your court. You being unhappy with the completeness of a piece of evidence doesn't drop the value of that evidence down to mere opinion and theref0re make it open to repudiation by you stating your opposing opinion.
 
Which is an entirely different topic, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of you supporting the rights of others to racially discriminate. But if you don't wish to continue that discussion, I'll be happy to drop it.

Actually, things I described are worse because those are PUBLIC forms of racism, which I am against. I support PRIVATE institutions in decisions made under their own volition. If the UNCF or NAACP won't do anything for me, fine. They have that right. Free association is a bitch. Maybe I should apply for a Grambling State scholarship and sue the NBA for discrimination, since racism should be eliminated.
 
Personally, I find this whole discussion strange, because I'm attracted to what I'm attracted too. It's not quantifiable as race but more from chemistry, personalty and character. I'm not sure I could control it if I wanted to.

Exactly. When I am attracted to someone, I don't run them through a series of filters in my mind, and say "Hmmm, he's white, he's tall, he has dark hair and hazel eyes, a great mouth, and a fine ass, so that means I should be attracted. I am first attracted, and then later I consciously recall his characteristics. The attraction is there first, then later I understand why.
 
You're not saying that to people who just post opinions, which would include you. Having data gives us something objective to analyze when compared to competing opinions. This automatically elevates the content to be a better reflection of reality than just mere opinion.

It's objective if the data is objective. If the data is faulty then it's crap.

As Gathomas88 is arguing, the ball is now in your court.

No the ball is in your court to answer the questions. If you are going to put data forward, you should be able to defend it. If you can't you and anyone else that does that will be suspect to a critical eye.
 
You are not obligated to answer and that's a good thing for you because you don't know the answer. And any person who knows anything about it would agree that the fact that you can't answer is a reason to look at the research as suspect.

Care to prove it?
 
This is childish. I have posed some reasonable, objective questions that have not been answered. Anyone that's actually done serious scientific research will understand.

I rest my case your honor.
 
This is childish. I have posed some reasonable, objective questions that have not been answered. Anyone that's actually done serious scientific research will understand.

I rest my case your honor.

Questions are not evidence.
 
Exactly. When I am attracted to someone, I don't run them through a series of filters in my mind, and say "Hmmm, he's white, he's tall, he has dark hair and hazel eyes, a great mouth, and a fine ass, so that means I should be attracted. I am first attracted, and then later I consciously recall his characteristics. The attraction is there first, then later I understand why.

I agree


Im the same way, same thing when people ask what your type is or was.

I dont have one really.

Im attracted too who im attracted too :shrug:

I could come up with "preferences" but they are pretty meaningless once the attraction happens.
 
Back
Top Bottom