Interracial dating
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: All Empires Community
Forum Name: AE Tavern
Forum Discription: Come here to introduce yourself and discuss almost anything under the sun! Or just to let your hair down...
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25962
Printed Date: 12-May-2024 at 10:17
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Interracial dating
Posted By: Suren
Subject: Interracial dating
Date Posted: 20-Nov-2008 at 19:14
|
I just heard 70% of African American women are single! is that true? why? Do you agree with interracial dating? plz come and share your opinion.
------------- Anfører |
Replies:
Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 20-Nov-2008 at 19:19
Absolutely!  I agree! -------------  
Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va! |
Posted By: Spartakus
Date Posted: 20-Nov-2008 at 19:20
Single? mmmmm....does this mean that i should change country????
------------- "There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. " --- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996) |
Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 20-Nov-2008 at 23:23
No I think it's a horrible and terrible idea, I mean just look at it....  http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=435&PID=8871#8871 - Sickening isn't it? ------------- Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative. Unless otherwise noted source is wiki. |
Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 00:07
|
70% are single? ------------- |
Posted By: xristar
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 00:59
*is it me, or here in greece we're kinda deprived?  *
------------- 
Defeat allows no explanation Victory needs none. It insults the dead when you treat life carelessly. |
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 08:40
|
Of course I agree with interracial dating, as long as I'm the one doing it.
------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 11:32
|
What percentage of African-American males are single? ------------- |
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 11:53
30%? 
------------- |
Posted By: Beylerbeyi
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 12:06
|
There was an article by a scientist on this in the New Scientist recently.
Many black males are either dead or in jail. Also the society more readily accepts black males marrying white women, but not vice versa. So black women eligible for marriage outnumber black men by a huge margin. Which means that many will never get married and have a stable family life, and they will be single parents. I dug it out: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19926726.400-perspectives-still-a-question-of-black-vs-white.html What needs to be done is the state to accept this situation (that many black women won't have a 'normal' family life) and move in to improve the lot of single black mothers. Fat chance of that happening with the Republican 'family values' morons running the country, blaming the women themselves for this situation. Of course they are blacks so who cares? We'll see if Obama will change anything. ------------- |
Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 17:06
Polygamy is the answer  ! Islamic law is kicking on the US door 
------------- Anfører |
Posted By: eaglecap
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 19:30
|
I see no problem with something that has been going on for God knows how long. I have dated a Japanese and Korean gal in the past. I find Mexican women attractive; Greek, Turkish and swiss also
My current girlfriend is: Norwegian, Swedish and German but that is really the same ethnic groups in my opinion. Here I am mostly; Greek, German and Irish- other - what a mutt If it had not been for a native american ancestor I would not be here. ------------- Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 23:51
|
Probably I'm the only one against 'racial' dating here.
Firstly, there are not human races, the expression interracial may apply to animals. I'm not only against dating between people of different types ('Caucasian', Asian, Black) but against marriage (I'm against extramarital relations idea too) between people from different ethnicities, because I think is an artificial relation. You and your spouse must be from the same people, else the cultural element will play a negative role in your relation. -------------  |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 00:26
|
Phrased in better words than Menu cultural elements do play a major part in successful relationships so primarily people do end up marrying people from similar cultures (which would be why this thread could have possibly existed in the first place). However people are very diverse and just because you were born into a particular culture it doesn't mean you aren't really attracted to other cultures. So there is a significant number of people who aren't the culture they would appear to be, or just love being in someone elses. In other words, people marry people who are similar to them. Sometimes this will follow another identifiable boundary like white men not marrying black women, or the upper classes marrying upper classes, but also quite often it does not because artificial boundaries usually don't describe actual people. ~ Just a question Menu, I don't have an ethnicity so who should I marry?
Doesn't that mean there should also be a lot of unmarried white men? ------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 01:27
|
To have a deep relation, it has not to be something cultural. You marry to become one with the other, not to discover cultures. An even if you are attracted by the person, not by the culture, the cultural difference is a barrier in getting in the other's soul.
I admit that my idea is grounded on the belief that God has for everyone a pair soul and you have to wait to find it, not to hurry attracted by different ideas, including the 'inter-cultural' one. And perhaps some are destined to remain singles. Don't take this as a fix rule but as a sugestion for a happier life. If someone is of mixed ethnic origin he/she should wait for the love of his/her life like everyone else and my idea can be useful for such a person too in not being confused with first impression ideas. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 01:42
Somehow I though you would respond like that... Your opinion and your entitled to it (although I deem it a rather regressive and racist one), but I must disagree based on deductions from successful relations all around me. ------------- |
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 01:45
|
No I agree with Menumorut, the closer the better. I'm asking my sister on a date tomorrow.
------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 01:47
------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 01:51
|
What do you mean by "interracial"?
For Latinos, for instance, marrying a "gringo" is interracial, no matter the couple could look very similar. Marrying a Gypsy, a Jew or many other minorities could be considered "interracial" for some, but it is likely there isn't major physical differences in the couple.
In here, at least, marryiange between Europeans and Indigenous people are considered more an intercultural marryiage than interracial.
------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 01:56
|
LOL LOL LOL LOL I love how "they believe," assuming that you know better than them what they think and believe. Is there anything on this world that is not an illusion Menu, I mean pretty much everything you disagree with is an illusion so far as mentioned by yourself. ------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 01:57
We have a different underastanding of succesful relation. Yes, there are couples that work well and they believe they are happy (because of their limited horizon and intoxication with clichees) but is not what I personally want. And I think I have a more mature than you understanding of the matter, I see it in the perspective of eternity. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 01:58
|
I don't get you.
I was just pointing out to cultural differences. ------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 01:58
I answer you on private. ------------- |
Posted By: Count Belisarius
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 02:18
|
I have no problem with it ------------- 
Defenders of Ulthuan, Cult of Asuryan (57 Kills and counting) 
|
Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 05:27
That's awesome. You have a beautiful babe over there JanusRook. Deos she have a sister? give me her number! ------------- Anfører |
Posted By: Flipper
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 09:42
LOL. I don't think so. Our women are giving us a hard time but we're not deprived for that reason. I was so possitive in answering on this thread because of past experiences. I have a long history of interacial relationships and personally i feel it was a good experience. -------------
Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va! |
Posted By: Slayertplsko
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 10:21
Hey do they still give those Greed Cards?? ------------- A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it's not open. |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 11:05
If the total number of 'blacks' and 'whites' was similar, yes, but there are lots more 'whites'. And single white males have an easier economic time of it than single black women, so the deficiency doesn't matter so much.
In the war between the sexes, why reinforce the enemy?
 ------------- |
! Islamic law is kicking on the US door 
Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 13:16
I agree though, culture does play an important part in attraction, however culture is not determined by "race". Me and my girlfriend are from similar cultures and thus we share a lot in common. Menu, have you ever seen Brazilians? How do they fit into your idea of culture?
Reginmund, from what I know of you, I wouldn't put anything past you.....
Thanks Suren, I'm sure she'll appreciate the compliment. She actually does have a half-sister, but I don't think her boyfriend would be to happy about her number being given out.
See to me 'interracial' relationships shouldn't be seen as any different than any other relationship. I mean as far as I'm concerned race is the farthest thing from my mind when it comes to who I'm attracted to. I mean there are bound to be culture clashes but then again you'll have things like that even in same race relationships, so basically as long as two people get along, and have a good time why even acknowledge such a trivial difference. ------------- Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative. Unless otherwise noted source is wiki. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 13:41
What you mean with this? To make me seem racist? Shouldn't I have expressed what I believe? ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 14:09
|
I believe that social status, place of living, education, work, hobbies and tastes are a lot more important that race or ethniticity among people and future couples. For instance, most of the times it is difficult to marry rich and highly educated people with poor, analphabet kind, no matter both could be of the same ethnic background and race.
By contrast, computer engineers, navy people or medical staff, have more things in common between themselves that people outside theirs activities, so there race or ethnicity seem less important in theirs relationships. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 15:15
That definetly is true, it is not determined by "race." And even then culture may not be the determining factor as often. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 15:17
Got to agree ------------- |
Posted By: calvo
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 16:06
|
"Race" today is often confused with "ethnicity" or "nationality"; so what people refer to as "race" could mean a different thing from one country to another.
Personally, I've always found women of all "looks" attractive as long as they have a sexy body, a beautiful face, and a warm smile.
However, I must say that many people (excluding myself), who have been brought up in very ethnically and racially homogeneous countries, and who have not travelled a lot or dealt with many outsiders; the idea of dating someone who doesn't belong to their "group" can be shocking, because its something they're not used to .
Take Spain for example, up until 10 years ago there were hardly any foreigners here, and even fewer people of a different colour. Among the people who had been brought up back then (people now aged 30+), "foreigners" were either idealised or demonized; and the attitude towards interracial dating tends to be rather polarised: some Spaniards are attracted ONLY to "exotic" foreigners; while others (the majority) would ONLY date Spaniards and the mere idea of dating a non-Spaniard is unthinkable.
Also, among this age group, it is almost far more socially acceptable for a Spanish man to date a foreign (esp darker-skinned) girl than the other way around.
Where I work there is a girl who is married to a Russian; and many pronvincial-minded collegues say: "God, she's wierd! With so many Spanish men around while would she marry a Russian?"
I could imagine that if she was married to a Black Africans the comment would be even more extreme.
On the other hand, there are a handful of male colleagues married to Latin American girls, and people don't tend to make such a fuss about it.
Among the younger generation, however, attitudes have changed. Teengers and people in their 20s have often grown up sharing neighbourhoods with Latin Americans, Africans, and Eastern Europeans; and "nationality" or "race" doesn't seem to be a major factor in dating.
In the center of Madrid and Barcelona you get to see more and more mixed couples; but most of them are under 25.
1 in every 10 marriages in Spain now are mixed-nationality; with the most common combination being a Spanish man with a Latin American woman.
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 16:29
That's curious. We, Latin Americans, don't consider Spaniards to be of a different "race" or "ethnicity". For us, Spaniards are just an Hispanic people more, that don't know how to speak Spanish properly
 Jesus! When I was a kid there was a Spaniard owning every breadmaking shop, and every wood schop in my country! And they even weared theirs Basque hats!
------------- |
Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2008 at 23:09
No I was just showing that culture can be independent of 'race'. So that when you say that people should practice endogamous relationships, (which isn't a racist statement), in a lot of cultures they do not have to be of the same race to have the same culture. So that you shouldn't reject interracial relationships outright, because what if the child adopts your culture? Or do you believe one can never adopt any other culture other than their own? ------------- Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative. Unless otherwise noted source is wiki. |
Posted By: Northman
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 00:37
|
I think we all should hook up with partners as different from ourselves as possible in respect to colour, culture, ethnicity, etc.
One day our decendants would all look alike and the ugly face of racsism and "me better than you" attitude would be history.
------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 00:37
|
I didn't say about endogamous. Just suggest that inter-cultural marriage is not as happy as one within your ethnic group. Not matter if is the same or other country, a different ethnic group represents another way of feeling that makes the other person remain a stranger to you in some degree.
Anybody can adopt any culture but will not be as his native culture.
I hope you are joking, because sounds like another social ideological program. Racism and extremist Nationalism cann't be combated with Multiculturalism because the last is another doctrine with no respect for human aspirations. Ethnicity is part of our identity as human beings, denying this means alienation, indoctrination. And here I'm NOT refering to inter-cultural marriage but strictly to this kind of propaganda. ------------- |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 01:41
Yes exactly. I know of a girl who when interviewing potential housemates tells them that she doesn't care about race, religion, or sex but she does insist that they are not a Liberal voter. So in this case the cultural divide does not run on racial grounds, but on political views. Her culture could be considered "anti-Liberal" and not related to her race.
I don't think this will make a difference. People will just redefine the group, could be family, place of birth, knowledge of Bradmans batting average etc. Racism is just a type of "groupism".
But you can have an inter-cultural marriage inside your ethnic group (for example, do you really consider an atheist communist feminist to have the same culture as you Menu?), or a intra-cultural one outside your ethnic group (for example someone who shared you exact world outlook & religious views but just so happened to be born somewhere else) As Pinguin said, what do a wealthy, highly educated, upper class person and a poor, illiterate farm worker have in common other than ethnicity? ------------- |
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 01:53
| the ethic question of interracial relationship is still yet to be debated. However, there are certain advantages of interracial marriages if you look at this issue from a scientific point of view; it has been established that interracial marriage tend to produce greater genetic variation, therefore not only is it okay to date someone from different race, it should in fact be encouraged. |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 02:09
Amazing. Sorry moderators, but I can't resist the following comment.
After centuries of being considered inferior "mongrels" by other westerners, now it happens that Latin Americans become the "superior race"
 It is amazing how much has changed the mentality in Europe and North-America, now that the caucasian population is heading fast to become senior citizens, and afterwards an extinct subspecies....
------------- |
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 02:21
Someone should ban this mongrel. 
------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 10:51
Dating doesn't produce children, unless people are being surprising Bowdlerish in saying 'dating'.  ------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 10:55
Yet when mongrel dogs or cats for instance mate at random the result is not uniformity (or even similarity). ------------- |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 11:07
Hey Bey,
I just thought I'd point out that we agree on something. Believe it or not, it isn't the first time. Anyway, I thought I'd let you know that I think you've summed it up quite well.
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 11:07
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 12:02
Well, that it is not quite true.
If you come to certain regions of Latin America, you will find people that is very uniform looking, that are the result of mixtures that happened many centuries ago. Mixtures get estabilized with time. That's why here in South America we can distinguish mixed Peruvian, Ecuatorians, Uruguayans or Chileans almost at first sight, but to foreigners we may look all the same. We are different physically quite a bit.
Other curious thing is that interracial mixtures don't happen at random. If you look at interracial couples you will notice something strange: they usually look similar in facial features and body shape, even across the races. For example, if a nordic man marries a japanese woman, it usually preffer the lighter women. Latinos preffer women with similar nose and lips shapes, no matter they come in other colors, etc.
Notice for instance these couple. The metrics of theirs faces don't look that varied at all. This couple has narrow faces, big chin. and the same eyebrows:
 here, same round eyes and "parrot-like" noses:
 big nosed couple:
 thin lips, narrow eyes, pointing chin, similar skin color. do you see what I mean?
 ------------- |
Posted By: calvo
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 12:13
This is a rather simplistic statement.
The fact is; what we consider as a "race" in the modern sense has a very short history compared to the history of Homo Sapiens.
From 200,000 years ago, humans were already 100% humans; yet the physionomy of humans has evolved considerably over all these mileniums. Human beings who lived only 10,000 years ago were physically different to what we look like now.
Blond hair only occured some 10,000 years ago; and only between 10,000 and 20,000 years ago did the mutation leading to "white skin" take place.
Genetic testing has revealed that "Otzi the Iceman": the frozen Neolithic corpse of a 5000-year-old sheppard found in the Alps; belonged to a "race" of mankind that is now extinct. (his halogroups did not belong to any of those in the modern living population) And 5000 years is a relatively short period of time. Some of the Egyptian pyramids were built 5000 years ago.
We also have to bare in mind that many of what we call "pure" races now, like Nordics or Japanese, are products of pre-historic mixtures of other races.
What mixing would produce will be offspring who look different to what we do now; but it will not ever make the world's population homogeneous.
Even if European, Asian, American, and African geness are distributed evenly throughout mankind, the differing climate and living conditions in each continent will lead to further mutations, leading to further genetic diversity.
To be more cynical; even if all the population in the world were "racially homogeneous", racism would still exist, because human beings will find other ways to divide ourselves into "us" and "them".
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 12:28
You bet. It is quite well known in the Americas that different degrees of mixing discriminate each other. I see it in my country where castizos (1:4 native, 3:4 european) and mestizos (1:2 european and 1:2 native) don't like pure Amerindians. Or in Cuba and Brazil where mulattos (1:2 black and 1:2 european) look down upon Blacks. etc.What's more, even if racism dissapear, nationalism, classism, colorism and ancestry will still divide people in small groups that won't like each other.
------------- |
Posted By: JanusRook
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 13:50
See North, I think that even though it would eliminate racism there would still be discrimination. I do not believe that uniformity should be the goal, but tolerance of diversity. If we are taught that different does not equal inferior, then we can accept those different then us more readily. Think of it this way in the future we are all one race but when someone has an child with a birth defect that family would be looked down upon due to a cultural taboo. Whereas if you had many different types of people, then everyone would be humanized and prejudice would also disappear in all forms. Mind you this may be a utopic view of the world though. ------------- Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative. Unless otherwise noted source is wiki. |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 14:13
|
You miss the point if you think you will stop discrimination with teaching alone. People discriminate the people that looks different because that is part of our animal hardwire programming. Animals in the jungle are very selective with the couples they choose to mate. A different tone of feather or proportion of the body will produce an immediate rejection. Unfortunatelly, when you push people of different aspect upon populations that aren't accustum to them, it is almost inevitable that rejection follows. If you push to much, hate
can exploit. It is not easy to deal with the crazy past of human beings.
------------- |
Posted By: calvo
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 14:27
One thing to bear in mind is that although human beings may look different across different continents, but in reality, the genetic diversity among humans is one of the smallest in the world. Among non-Africans, the diversity is even smaller because we descend from less than 200 individuals some 60,000 years ago.
Among animals, the rejection or "protection of their own" happens more across different species, or different subspecies. By biological definition, ALL human beings alive today belong to the same species (homo-sapiens), and also the same sub-species (homo-sapiens-sapiens).
Many milenia ago, there was another subspecies of homo-sapiens (homo sapies arcaico), which apparently became extinct some 70,000 years ago.
What we call "race" in the biological sense is determined by phenotype, and also by the combination of halogroups; these differences, however, are minute compared to the difference found among different species, even chimpazees.
Genetists have discovered that very often within the same "clan" of chimpanzees, there is more genetic diversity than all the humans in the world put together!
In the social sense, "race" is "ethnic group" or "nationality", and the definition varies from country to country, era to era.
I disagree that humans reject those who look different by instinct. All you have to do is look at history (and pre-history). Among human society, the greatest division of mankind has always been language; nowadays, perhaps religion and economic and cultural status a well.
Many ethnic groups who "look different" have blended with each other far more harmoniously than ethnic groups who look similar. I don't think the colour of skin or the shape of the skull has much to do with it.
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 14:57
|
Yes, your approach is very rational. However, the real racism is not very rational but rather instinctive. When you see the low passions that existed in the past centuries, we can't explain them just asking people to be rational. There is something more primitive going on in the mind of people, I am afraid. And I believe in part is the instinct of self-preservation.
The explanation for me is simple. Human beings were tribal people until not more than 5.000 years ago, and in many cases even until recent times. Tribes are small group of people higher interrelated among them and highly uniform. For them, any physical difference, no matter how small it was, noticed in others human beings meant danger.
In modern days, humans are expossed to more varied people. However, even these days, when somebody visible different appears in a group that aren't accustummed to those phenotypes, reactions happened. The people different from the perceive "normal" average, it is in risk of being discriminated. That's seen all over the world, even in Africa you can see how pigmeys, for instance, are discriminated by bantues, and how hutus and tutsis killed each other because differences to us are trivial.
Adults are usually educated to be more tolerant, so attitude of people tend to be softened by culture. However, you can observe very wild reactions among children of short age, when they perceive a strange fellow has come. The teachers will make them "behave" later, but those reactions exist.
------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 14:57
|
interesting... i'm ok with it.. as long as the couple knw how to handle their relationship.. instead of letting a collision of two different cultures to be happened, they must knw how to assimilate with each other.. for wht i see.. the couple need a little bit extra of anything compare to the usual couple. For example, need to be more understanding, supportive and etc. In my opinion, it's fascinating to be with someone who his or her upbringing is different from urself. There is always a new thing to experience everyday. ------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 16:04
|
A side topic to this is the matter of interracial (for want of a better word) adoption of children. I was for a while involved with a charity here (I did a lot of translation for them) that organises adoption primarily of Brazilian, Peruvian, Korean and Indian children for European couples here, especially Luxembourgers because the fertility rate among native Luxembourgers has dropped to near-disaster levels.
On whe whole it seems to work out pretty well, but that may be largely because of the polyglot and multinational culture here. Since a substantial number of these children are now in their late teens and twenties we are also beginning to see a considerable amount of 'interracial' (but common culture) 'dating'.
I don't think their next-generation children will develop uniformly physically however: the variety is likely to remain much the same - or even increase. ------------- |
Posted By: Temujin
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 20:50
that's a nice idea but the downside of everyone looking alike is there's a lack of diversity then and i really like diversity. oh well Janus already beat me to it. |
Posted By: Northman
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 21:46
Yes, I like diversity as well and I agree with you as well as with Janus statement "tolerance of diversity".
My statement was just another way to express my aversion for that particular "breed" of people who can only elevate themselves by belittleling others - no matter which common denominator we use, colour, culture, ethnicity etc. - and no matter which level we observe.
In my utopia, I'm looking forward to the day when we will stop talking about different human races, stop looking for what separate us and start looking for similarities instead.
------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2008 at 22:29
That's an utopia, I am afraid. If you go to countries were large scale mixinga had happened already, you will notice that they still discriminate. Sometimes, even among inside families. ------------- |
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2008 at 08:44
Sounds sterile and boring. Why would we want to stop racism anyway? As long as it merely exists on an informal level it's a spice of life, along with snobbery and ideological conceit. All part of the games we play. ------------- |
Posted By: Northman
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2008 at 12:49
It might sound sterile and boring to us, and we can make rich statements like that in our safe environment being who we are, but I'm sure the people on the receiving end of racism don't find it to be informal, nor do they think of it as a part of a game.
------------- |
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2008 at 13:09
See this is what I mean by sterile and boring. We're on this planet for too short a time to start taking it seriously. Notice how this thread is starting to become way too serious for the tavern. People have such a tense relationship with races they can't even have a lighthearted chat about interracial dating. ------------- |
Posted By: calvo
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2008 at 22:18
I agree with you that humans have tribal instincts, and we always have to divide people into "in groups" and "out groups".
Nevertheless, tribal societies were not quite as endogamic as you might think; because when human beings move in bands of small numbers, it is VERY necessary to absorb genes from the outside world to avoid inbreeding.
This is why many Central Asian nomad peoples, such an Turkic and Mongol peoples, are strongly exdogamic. To many of them, marrying within one's tribe was almost a taboo.
despite their strong tribal instincts, they constantly mix with those around them and as a result, they tend to display the phenotypes of their neighbouring peoples.
Many ancient Turkic and Mongol tribal federations (the Xiongnu, Gokturks, Kipchaks etc) were united by a common language and culture, but "racially" speaking they were VERY heterogeneous, with Mongoloids at the eastern end and Europoids at the western end; with the vast majority somewhere in between.
Xenophobia had no doubt existed in their society, but "colour racism" as known in the modern colonial era certainly did not exist.
Citing other examples; many ancient empires, such as Rome, Egypt, and Persia, were also multi-cultural and multi-racial societies. divisions among tribal lines was certainly present, but among "skin colour" apparently did not.
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2008 at 23:28
|
Well, in the Colonial Spanish Empire, the reality was quite different. Although people lived together, everyone stayed at its place. And everyone understood key saying such as "improving the race". Therefore, for me is hard to believe racism was absent in ancient empires. ------------- |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2008 at 23:38
|
No, its because appearance is only one of the ways we differentiate and discriminate against people. We have, and will again, invent any weird and crazy criteria we wish.
------------- |
Posted By: calvo
Date Posted: 25-Nov-2008 at 07:09
Yes, DISCRIMINATION has always existed in every society, and so did social class exist in EVERY society; but social class had not always been defined by "racial appearance".
The modern concept of race is heavily influenced by the colonialism in the last few centuries, during which most, if all all empires were of European origin, and therefore the "upper classes" of the empires had European facial features.
The add to that was the African slave trade, during which subconsciously, people tended to equate black skin with "slavery".
In Ancient Empires, caste systems and discrimination did exist between the nobility and the commoners, the freemen and the slaves, yet up to now, I have not heard of a single ancient empire who held a census that divided its population by skin colour, hair colour etc.
The Romans, the Chinese, and the Persians, placed great emphasis on one's tribal origins; yet "tribal origins" were a rather fluid concept as one could be "adopted" by another tribe and become a fully-fledged member. It is probabaly very similar to what we call today: nationality.
Slaves did exist and were often treated harshly, yet it wasn't defined by colour. In the Egyptian, Roman, and Persian empires, there were slaves of light and dark skin; as well o nobility of light and dark skin.
The Roman Empire indeed treated its colonies very harshly, yet "Romaness" was never defined by "race", especially "race" in the modern concept. the city of Rome itself was founded by 2 very distant ethnic groups: Latins and Etruscans; and the early Roman nobility had members of both bloodlines, as well as the plebeians.
In the colonies, many pure-blooded natives became Roman citizens and ten rose up the ranks to become part of the nobility, or even the Emperor. Out of all the Roman dynasties, only the first 2 were of Italian origin. Later on there were Hispanics, North Africans, Syrians, Illyrians etc.
Even today, the importance of "racial appearance" differs from society to society.
In the USA and South Africa there was apartheid, yet in Egypt, having darker or lighter skin had little to do with one's social status, instead, it was whether you're Christian or Muslim.
Many other nationalities like Tatars, Uzbeks, Uighurs also display very diverse racial appearance from pure Mongoloid to nordid caucasoids; yet unlike in Latin America, these nationalities do not consider one type of racial features to be "socially superior" than another because historically they did not have a "racially-defined" nobility.
I'm sure they have other ways to discriminate one from the other, but certainly not by colour.
|
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 04-Dec-2008 at 06:31
I tried to understand what is with this hostility against me from some members and today I think I found. I think you make a connection between my veganism and supposed (actually, imaginary) racism and the ones of Hitler. This is paranoia. I don't know why hitler was vegan, I'm because I found savour in ascetism (I spend more than an year in monastery) and later I found being a vegan very pleasantful, you become very healthy and energetic and ofcourse you feel superior to others which make you self-confident and strong in a measure. As for my "racism", I admit that I don't like to see my people becoming outnumbered by other nations in the land of their ancestors, I think nobody like this. There have been some posts of mine that created the false impression that I'm racist. It was the thread that I created about a country of Roma people. My idea was that as the Jewish people got a homeland after centuries of being foreigners everywhere and that made them feel good, the same would happen with Roma people. Other post was one in which I said that the Third Reich has had some good achievements (and I mentioned the Germanization of economy and the rise of national conscience). I think I was wrong with that message. As for what I said in this topic, I really believe that and is not something racist, just read it again. ------------- |
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 04-Dec-2008 at 07:44
|
The mongrel comment was a joke directed at pinguin. I have no issue with you loving your people. It's only natural, like loving one's family. ------------- |