• 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
Peter Grimm said:
Alright, enough of this. Snip.

On topic, so do you think the only reason someone would have a negative gut reaction to an interracial couple is because they're racist?
Click to expand...

Totally butting in here. Just out of curiosity (sincerely) what would other reasons be?
 
Hard Truth said:
No rivers of blood either.
Click to expand...



London+Rioters.jpg


london-riots11.jpg
 
Arcana XV said:
Last week I took a yoga class.

Yeah, that's how much sense you're making right now. :lol:
Click to expand...

You made it sound like my having a perspective that I bring to this issue is somehow a bad thing. I was just wondering if you were pure, you know, you had no opinions or world view at all, because you've established that having a perspective on issues is something that is frowned upon.
 
RiverDad said:
You made it sound like my having a perspective that I bring to this issue is somehow a bad thing. I was just wondering if you were pure, you know, you had no opinions or world view at all, because you've established that having a perspective on issues is something that is frowned upon.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to imply that all perspectives are worthy of respect?
 
Arcana XV said:
Are you trying to imply that all perspectives are worthy of respect?
Click to expand...

You're certainly free to try to crush any argument I make. If you can't do that, then I'd say that my argument is worthy of respect.

Don't hold back, give it your best shot.

I'm guessing here, but I'm pretty certain that I'm not going to respect your perspective and that's because it's likely to be weak and incoherent and can't withstand challenge. You not respecting my perspective because you can't counter it isn't a good basis for withdrawing respect.

"He's wrong, I know he's wrong, but I just don't know why he's wrong" is not a winning formula.
 
RiverDad said:
You're certainly free to try to crush any argument I make. If you can't do that, then I'd say that my argument is worthy of respect.

Don't hold back, give it your best shot.

I'm guessing here, but I'm pretty certain that I'm not going to respect your perspective and that's because it's likely to be weak and incoherent and can't withstand challenge. You not respecting my perspective because you can't counter it isn't a good basis for withdrawing respect.

"He's wrong, I know he's wrong, but I just don't know why he's wrong" is not a winning formula.
Click to expand...

I'll do that when I have a firmer grasp on what exactly your argument is. So far, all I see you do is use shaky science to build what I suspect to be a justification for racial prejudice. Like you, I'm simply guessing here, though. :) The jury's still out on that.

Now what I mean by "shaky science" is that, fascinated as I am by the field of social sciences, it's a field that is constantly reinventing itself, contradicting its own findings, sometimes with speeds that make your head spin. No sooner is one study released, three more will follow that often reverse the original results. That's the bitch when studying humanity and its interactions with itself and the world around it. Humans can be very predictable, but they're also very adaptable and very prone to seek progress and change. Societies are forever evolving and trying to establish lasting patterns in this environment is interesting as hell, but ultimately quite pointless.
 
Arcana XV said:
Now what I mean by "shaky science" is that, fascinated as I am by the field of social sciences, it's a field that is constantly reinventing itself, contradicting its own findings, sometimes with speeds that make your head spin.
Click to expand...

I'm not a social scientist, I'm the other kind.
 
Gipper said:
One has a problem. Six have an opinion.
Click to expand...

And then there are those who saw the poll as being poorly constructed and so didn't even bother to vote.
 
Gipper said:
One has a problem. Six have an opinion.
Click to expand...

You are apparently referring to the poll in this thread. I am referring to the posts in the link I offered in the post you previously quoted.
 
grip said:
The Nazi's had a problem.
Click to expand...

More likely it was people who drew a dividing line between individual liberty and community interest at a different point than you.
 
RiverDad said:
More likely it was people who drew a dividing line between individual liberty and community interest at a different point than you.
Click to expand...

Nessum Dorma.
 
Gipper said:
Basically.

Radical Muslims have a problem. Atheists have an opinion.
Click to expand...

Agnostics have an opinion. Atheists claim a reality they cannot prove.
 
RiverDad said:
Your analysis is sound. What this study tells us is really quite restricted - of those people who WILL state a preference, this is how matters fall out. What these study participants have done is known as "Expressed Preferences" but we know from research and even from how we all live life that there is often quite a big difference between what we say and what we do and this disparity between what is said and what is done is largest when the issue is sensitive or there is a "politically correct" position.

For instance, a woman might well say "I would date a black man and I would judge his suitability on his personality and not on race." Over the course of many introductions to black men she never manages to find one who meets her suitability criteria while meeting many white men who she does date. What's going on? We don't even have to assume that she's lying about her position, she might well believe it because she wants to think of herself as that kind of person. Her actions though tell a different story.
Click to expand...

That's one of the problems with this type of thing. As a result, it becomes difficult to draw objective conclusions. And although you may say her actions tell a different story, because it's an internal subjective thing, she might be telling the truth. So it's hard, very difficult.

RiverDad said:
Issues like this can be looked at from a number of different levels. I'm surprised that so many people in that survey actually did reveal preferences and state exclusions because those are very politically incorrect positions to declare.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a surprise that people reveal their preferences. I know that you have to be careful how you take samples when doing this type of statistical work. If you don't, you could be lead to some conclusions that don't necessarily conform to reality.

RiverDad said:
This OK Cupid data takes us one step up the ladder - now we're looking at actions. These aren't dates between people, just women responding to men, but already we're seeing differences starting to emerge:
Click to expand...

I would be very careful about drawing conclusions from raw data taken from an online dating site. Again, how well does such a sample conform to the real life popuplation?
 
MildSteel said:
I think 20 percent is "lots." What if 20 percent of the bridges you drove across collapsed? Wouldn't that be a lot?
Click to expand...

Losing 80% of the vote to your competitor would be humiliating, and I think that's a far more apt comparison than bridge collapses.
 
MildSteel said:
I would be very careful about drawing conclusions from raw data taken from an online dating site. Again, how well does such a sample conform to the real life popuplation?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Translation:

racist1.gif


Again, if you want to dispute the study's findings, go ahead and do so.

If you want to be taken seriously, however, I would suggest finding an objective and factual basis on which to attack its methodology, rather than flying into unjustifiable hysterics and simply assuming its conclusions must be false out of hand because they happen to make you feel uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

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

First of all, how did the researcher compile the data sample. In other words it's practically impossible to examine every black women, so they had to pick some. How did they pick them?
Click to expand...

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

Next of all, the study is based on an individual's perception of attractiveness. I could see no objective criteria established for measuring attractiveness.
Click to expand...

That's an objective question and one that has an answer. But again, you don't know the answer. You pointed to another source, but you did not demonstrate that the criteria in your source were actually used in that research. Again, it appears you don't know what you are talking about. Either that or you don't understand the question that is being asked.
 
DiAnna said:
You are apparently referring to the poll in this thread. I am referring to the posts in the link I offered in the post you previously quoted.
Click to expand...
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?
 
MildSteel said

But in the case of attractiveness, that is something that will be very hard, because it tends to vary from person to person
Click to expand...

Gathomas88 said:
This is simply false. With at least some level of accuracy, the physical attractiveness of a given person can be objectively measured and quantified using scientific and mathematical principles.

I have already demonstrated this, and here is another source discussing the issue.

BBC Science - Attraction
Click to expand...

Not it is not false. First of all I did not say it's impossible, I said it's difficult. And that's exactly what I meant. And that little source you provided does not refute what I have said. It's simplistic stuff meant for lay people. It's not meant for someone trying to seriously research the matter. For example, your source simply asserts symmetric facial features. But I have seen women with have a good deal of facial symmetry, but who have a very big nose that spoils the whole effect. Good, objective criteria needs to account for things like that. Also, the only math that's in the source is a very simplistic reference to 0.7 waist to hip ratio being as being attractive. But what if a woman is 5 feet 1 inch tall and has a 50 inch hips and a 35 inch waist? That's a 0.7 waist to hip ratio, but I would not find that very attractive.

Then next of all what's attractive does vary from person to person. And an accurate, objective measure of physical attractiveness would take this variance into account. Although it would be very difficult, it's not impossible. For example consider these two well know celebrities:

Paris Hilton
parishilton.jpg


Serena Williams
Serena.jpg


I can tell you this, you give me the choice to pick who I want to bone, and 7 times out of 10 I'm going with Serena. And that mostly has to do with whats going on from the backside. But someone like you would have no interest in Serena at all. I'm not sure, but in your eyes you may prefer the rear view that Paris has to offer. Definitely not me!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom