|
Silence8 -> RE: What race do you prefer in a relationship (11/24/2009 5:27:47 AM)
|
The curious sentiment running through this thread is that, in the neo-liberal 'tolerant' world, preference against or even for specific races cannot be tolerated. Basically, for political reasons, we're supposed to lie that we have no preferences; if, ultimately, we end up in a relationship with someone of the same race, we attribute it to 'accident' or external socioeconomic boundaries.
Of course, like any legal pretext, there exists numerous exceptions that do not sum up to a logical whole.
For one, we are on some levels forced to admit that there are no races.
Next, we can prefer a race if it is our own and if we consider ourselves part of some minority class. No one really claims that an ethnic minority who prefers ethic minorities is racist.
Next, if you're of the dominant class but have an attraction to an historically subordinate class, you're labeled essentially as a fetishist, this position in a circular fashion promoting the very separation that tolerance is supposed to address.
Think about the word: 'tolerance'. I might not like you, I might wash my hands after being in contact with you (you the ethnic minority, usually in some subordinate position), but, I'm a 'progressive' -- I can tolerate you. This sentiment has dominated this thread. Your ideology has left you in an awkward position, wanting to embrace obvious cultural, ethnic, even physical differences while being forced not to admit their very existence.
'I cannot choose. I like humans. All humans, great and small!' -- what an obvious, convenient abstraction. Like the censorship 'bleep' on television, the very sound implies what it's hiding.
|
|
|
|
