Why the racial preference?

[fskn]

4 hours ago, BlackDude said:

No, I’m not into the whole gumbo pot “some like black, some like short, some like twinks we all have preferences! Racism, preferences it’s all the same!”

I don't know who wrote that, but it's not what I wrote, or even what I wrote about. I wrote about becoming aware of our unconscious criteria for attractiveness, asking ourselves whether our criteria help us select for better socializing and fucking (or not), and never shaming people who don't meet our criteria (which are about us, not about the other people).

4 hours ago, BlackDude said:

Guys who won’t fuck twinks or red heads won’t attack or not hire twinks or redheads. But guys who don’t fuck black guys WONT hire blacks guys.

The claim in the second sentence is possible, especially in cases where someone has a conscious, and very strong, prejudice. Nevertheless, in the US, marital bedrooms are much more heavily segregated than workplaces.

I hope other readers will rethink the claim in the first sentence, substituting "effeminate men" and then "trans women" for "twinks", to recognize that gender-based prejudice can indeed also spill over.

4 hours ago, BlackDude said:

Thats another reason I say if you have a preference, put it out there. Don’t be ashamed or waste folks time.

I was aware of your preference to be excluded upfront. My own preference for myself, and my practice toward others, is just different.

This would be a great debate to have with the owners of Grindr, who decided last year to change their profile moderation practices, making negative racial preference statements (though not positive ones, which, when inverted, amount to the same thing) subject to removal. They felt that this would create a less toxic online environment.

I would add two things about excluding people in profile text:

1. It's hard (well, impossible, actually) to write up an explicit exclusion statement if we're not conscious of the reasons why we find some people less attractive than others. Yes, a stereotypical redneck who has a strong, conscious bias against Black people would know this well enough to be able to write it in a profile (if it were allowed, i.e., not on Grindr), but most people have much more complex decision-making processes.

2. The fear that people's time is being wasted, a reference I often see in Grindr profiles, strikes me as one-sided / self-regarding. Both parties give time when interacting online. Communicating successfully (i.e., understanding each other) takes time. Neither party is presumed to be God's gift to the world, worthy of instant responses and absolute clarity.

How many seconds does it really take to tap someone in Grindr? And how many minutes does it take to move on and tap the person in the next grid square, if the last guy didn't tap you back (which was my idea for a minimum-harm way of rejecting people we don't find attractive for whatever reason)?

Edited August 5, 2021 by fskn
Left out key word

[Guest]

I have to say I am basically a white whore and have had different types of cocks small, big, young men and old men but i have to admit i have not yet been fucked by a black man, and have to say I would love to feel a black men fuck me and penetrate me, i have to admit sometimes i do am afraid, as i see black men have such big cocks and crave to explore it. i have not found any difference in white, oriental as i have been fucked by them, i have to say wish i had a black men fuck me and feel the difference certainly it would be an experience never to forget with a big cock and long and deep fuck.  I for my part have no racial opinion and would love to be fucked by them all.

[BlackDude]

18 hours ago, fskn said:

I don't know who wrote that, but it's not what I wrote, or even what I wrote about. I wrote about becoming aware of our unconscious criteria for attractiveness, asking ourselves whether our criteria help us select for better socializing and fucking (or not), and never shaming people who don't meet our criteria (which are about us, not about the other people).

The claim in the second sentence is possible, especially in cases where someone has a conscious, and very strong, prejudice. Nevertheless, in the US, marital bedrooms are much more heavily segregated than workplaces.

I hope other readers will rethink the claim in the first sentence, substituting "effeminate men" and then "trans women" for "twinks", to recognize that gender-based prejudice can indeed also spill over.

I was aware of your preference to be excluded upfront. My own preference for myself, and my practice toward others, is just different.

This would be a great debate to have with the owners of Grindr, who decided last year to change their profile moderation practices, making negative racial preference statements (though not positive ones, which, when inverted, amount to the same thing) subject to removal. They felt that this would create a less toxic online environment.

I would add two things about excluding people in profile text:

1. It's hard (well, impossible, actually) to write up an explicit exclusion statement if we're not conscious of the reasons why we find some people less attractive than others. Yes, a stereotypical redneck who has a strong, conscious bias against Black people would know this well enough to be able to write it in a profile (if it were allowed, i.e., not on Grindr), but most people have much more complex decision-making processes.

2. The fear that people's time is being wasted, a reference I often see in Grindr profiles, strikes me as one-sided / self-regarding. Both parties give time when interacting online. Communicating successfully (i.e., understanding each other) takes time. Neither party is presumed to be God's gift to the world, worthy of instant responses and absolute clarity.

How many seconds does it really take to tap someone in Grindr? And how many minutes does it take to move on and tap the person in the next grid square, if the last guy didn't tap you back (which was my idea for a minimum-harm way of rejecting people we don't find attractive for whatever reason)?

I think all that sounds good if we are living in a world where people were just politely “scroll” or ignore if they are not interested.
 

Part of the problem is that some of these preferences are not part of some and conscious bias. Many are very calculated and I’d say about half the guys it’s not just about the actual preference, it’s about letting everyone know you have a preference. For example:

 

1. I’ve been message before out of the blue and called “monkey faggot,” among other things

2.Guys messaging other guys chastising them for BB, on a BB site and for not being HIV negative

3. Asking for pics just to shame the guy

4. Messaging X type when your profile states “no X type”

5. Starting a convo with a guy, with the full intention of letting him know he’s not your type. 

All this stuff happens. Folks like this are very aware of what they are doing. To a lot of these guys, it’s about ego gratification, and not being able to discreetly troll or cast down the men they don’t like takes away their power. 

That’s why I like an upfront approach. I state right up front in my profile names what your a getting. 

(BTW, I had fun with quite a few rednecks/southerners in my time. It’s those “liberal” SF/WeHo/Midtown types who tend to be more biased…just saying….)

[BootmanLA]

21 hours ago, fskn said:

making negative racial preference statements (though not positive ones, which, when inverted, amount to the same thing) subject to removal. They felt that this would create a less toxic online environment.

That depends. For instance, "Only interested in white guys" does, yes, invert to "No people of color". But the "positive" racial preference statement like "I tend to prefer [white/black/Hispanic/Asian/fillintheblank] guys as a general rule" doesn't invert to "No [other types of people] should message me." Or even more so: "Mostly attracted to [Nordic blonds/swarthy Middle Easterners/southeast Asians]" makes it clear there's a "type" you like, and yes, it may be mostly people of one race, but it's not the same thing as "No blacks", which I used to see routinely in personal ads.

21 hours ago, fskn said:

The fear that people's time is being wasted, a reference I often see in Grindr profiles, strikes me as one-sided / self-regarding. Both parties give time when interacting online. Communicating successfully (i.e., understanding each other) takes time. Neither party is presumed to be God's gift to the world, worthy of instant responses and absolute clarity.

How many seconds does it really take to tap someone in Grindr? And how many minutes does it take to move on and tap the person in the next grid square, if the last guy didn't tap you back (which was my idea for a minimum-harm way of rejecting people we don't find attractive for whatever reason)?

I can't speak for Grindr as I haven't used it (yes, really), but it sounds like "taps" are some sort of non-word communication indicating some interest in another person. If so, I agree: no harm done by being tapped by someone in whom you have no interest.

But most other apps I've been on allow direct verbal communication with someone - ie you can say "Hi, you're hot, I'd love to suck your cock" as an opening line and there's nothing to prevent the other guy from seeing your message when it comes through. Or sometimes it's innocuous ("Hi, how are you doing?") and politeness seems to demand you reply SOMEHOW to the polite guy - even though you're dreading it because once you do, he's going to want to talk more, and you're not interested. Very few guys seem to have the social skills needed: the ability to just say "Hi, doing OK here, thanks. Heading offline in a few, have a good evening"; even fewer have the skills to recognize the subtext, which is "I'm not interested, thanks, but don't want to offend, so please accept my declining as is, instead of making me spell it out".

 

[Blatinobttm]

13 hours ago, BlackDude said:

I think all that sounds good if we are living in a world where people were just politely “scroll” or ignore if they are not interested.
 

Part of the problem is that some of these preferences are not part of some and conscious bias. Many are very calculated and I’d say about half the guys it’s not just about the actual preference, it’s about letting everyone know you have a preference. For example:

 

1. I’ve been message before out of the blue and called “monkey faggot,” among other things

2.Guys messaging other guys chastising them for BB, on a BB site and for not being HIV negative

3. Asking for pics just to shame the guy

4. Messaging X type when your profile states “no X type”

5. Starting a convo with a guy, with the full intention of letting him know he’s not your type. 

All this stuff happens. Folks like this are very aware of what they are doing. To a lot of these guys, it’s about ego gratification, and not being able to discreetly troll or cast down the men they don’t like takes away their power. 

That’s why I like an upfront approach. I state right up front in my profile names what your a getting. 

(BTW, I had fun with quite a few rednecks/southerners in my time. It’s those “liberal” SF/WeHo/Midtown types who tend to be more biased…just saying….)

You make SO MANY good points!  I have had guys HMU on apps just to call me the N word. 
 

Others that just HMU with “BBC”?. Which can be as insulting in its own way. 
 

As someone who can see beauty  in every race and color. I tend to prefer MOC because they see ME as a person and ME sexually not as some novelty. It also doesn’t bother them that I am a big dicked bottom and feel no need to top.

I get ‘preferences’ but no that when some use that word they really mean bias or fetish.

[Guest]

On 3/1/2021 at 9:45 AM, FFslutboi said:

There's a paradox relevant to this discussion that's being treated like the elephant in the room:

Nobody likes to be objectified.

But when seeking someone to fuck, everybody does it.

Anyone want to try resolving that basic incongruity?

As far as racial preferences go, as long as they're preferences, in my book that's just fine. It's when the preference rise to the level of total exclusion/stereotypical troupes/exclusivity that I see it becoming problematic. Also, if anybody reading this enjoys doing that fucking cringe pr0n where you're both screaming racist shit while fucking, please, just stop.

Which porn is racist? Is that now a niche sex kink? I remember when the racist porn below came out. No I did not watch it, but my friend that is black and gay liked the two guys in it but he did not watch it or want to see it, and we find this type of porn or sex fantasy distasteful...

[think before following links] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niggas'_Revenge