Slate’s Reihan Salam wants you to know: You’re a “racist” if you’re attracted to people who look like you. The great thing about his piece is that if that conclusion bothers you, reading past the headline is unnecessary. It’s titled: ‘Is It Racist to Date Only People of Your Own Race? Yes.’
Take OkCupid, for example — the dating service run by hypocritical CEO Sam Yagan, who recently engaged in character assassination because Brendan Eich once donated to an anti-gay marriage bill … even though he donated to a staunchly anti-gay marriage politician. The site asks a number of questions to figure out what type of person you’re physically attracted to. To race-obsessed Slate writers, that makes those **cough**white people**cough** who are attracted to a mate who looks like them “racist.”
One of OkCupid’s questions reads as follows: “Would you strongly prefer to go out with someone of your own skin color/racial background?” I was struck by the not inconsiderable number of people who answered “yes”—including some people I know “in real life,” many of whom are hilariously self-righteous about their enlightened political views.
Keep in mind that OkCupid users can skip a question with ease. The people who answered this question had every opportunity to pass it by. What I found surprising about the fact that a fair number of people answered that they would indeed strongly prefer to go out with someone of their own skin color/racial background was not that this phenomenon exists in the world. …
In The American Non-Dilemma, Nancy DiTomaso argues that persistent racial inequality in the United States is not solely or even primarily a reflection of racism and discrimination. Rather, it reflects the fact that whites tend to help other whites without ever discriminating against or behaving cruelly toward blacks and other nonwhites. As long as whites tend to dominate prestigious occupations, and as long as they control access to valuable social resources like access to good schools, the fact that whites, like all people, will do more to help family, friends, and acquaintances than strangers will tend to entrench racial inequality, provided that white people choose to associate primarily with other whites.
To the liberal mind, white people who do not discriminate towards minorities — who do not think cruel thoughts about them at all — are still “racist” if the color that they find most attractive is what they see when they look in the mirror. To liberals like Suey Park, it doesn’t matter what’s going on in a white person’s mind — their skin has determined their fate: “racist.”
To the liberal mind, it is “racist” to help your family, friends and acquaintances if you are white because white people “dominate prestigious occupations.”
Yes, even though the writer acknowledges that “all people” help those who are in their immediate circle of friends and family, we must constantly monitor non-discriminatory white people because they “control access to valuable social resources.”
What is more likely holding back black people in Chicago: white Americans who are really nice — who just so happen to be attracted to someone who looks like them — or the fact that blacks are slaughtering each other in the streets like something you’d find in the Middle East?
Time magazine reports — welcome to ‘Chiraq’:
At least nine people were killed and at least 36 wounded in Chicago over the Easter weekend, prompting a newly formed federal unit to step in to help tackle the city’s pervasive culture of gun violence.
In a Monday statement, a prosecutorial unit called the Violent Crimes section said it will put its full focus on how to use federal statutes to combat Chicago’s endemic gang and gun problem, giving the city its nickname “Chiraq.” The shootings over the weekend brought the total number of suspected homicide this year to 90, two less than during the same period last year.
These record numbers come despite the fact that it appears the city is finding creative ways to lower it’s murder rate. Need to get rid of crime? Don’t call it crime. Genius!
From Chicago magazine:
Toxicology tests showed she had heroin and alcohol in her system, but not enough to kill her. All signs pointed to foul play. According to the young woman’s mother, who had filed a missing-person report, the police had no doubt. “When this detective came to my house, he said, ‘We found your daughter. . . . Your daughter has been murdered,’ ” Alice Groves recalls. “He told me they’re going to get the one that did it.”
On October 28, a pathologist ruled the death of Tiara Groves a homicide by “unspecified means.” This rare ruling means yes, somebody had killed Groves, but the pathologist couldn’t pinpoint the exact cause of death.
Given the finding of homicide—and the corroborating evidence at the crime scene—the Chicago Police Department should have counted Groves’s death as a murder. And it did.
On a deeper level, perhaps Slate’s Reihan Salam is saying that if only more of Chicago’s white population would date black people, they could save black people from themselves. Mr. Salam, why do you have such a low opinion of Chicago’s black population? Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.
According to Slate’s Reihan Salam, if you’re a white guy who was turned off to Asians because you associate them with the likes of Suey “only white people can be racist” Park, you are (ta-da!) racist. See how that works?
More from Ms. Park:
“[My work] is but one step in a plan to take down white, hetero, patriarchal, corporate America. … Can you make a pinky promise to keep my radical agenda in your article?”
As a member of white, hetero corporate America, I exhausted my patience with people like Reihan Salam and Suey Park long ago. The more that they scream “racist!” the more I laugh at them. The more they torture logic to turn nice law-abiding white people into “racists” — while cities like Chicago turn into “Chiraq” — the more I mock them.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to get to my job, which makes Slate’s Reihan Salam sad. He apparently wishes I was fired and replaced with a person of color because my continued employment perpetuates racism. I was thinking about willingly giving it up the other day to a guy from Chicago, but I heard he was shot and killed over Easter. Sad. I guess I’ll keep my job for awhile longer.
What a load of nonsense!
Does this work both ways? If an African American only wanted to date other African Americans is he racist? I’m guessing the answer is no.
I suppose people who only want to date people of the opposite sex and homophobic. This Slate website sounds like a waste data.
I’m assuming that since the writer believes white people (being in the majority) hold many positions of power, than he would not concern himself with the same rule applies to minorities who are primarily attracted to other minorities.
I just find it that the new “racism” (it changes all the time) includes anyone who is not physically attracted to minorities. Heh. I’m married now, but if I was a single guy and having sex with a black woman wasn’t high on my priority list: “racist!” Okay. Gotcha. Slate writers need to seek psychological help.
*Sigh* Just another example of a First World “problem.” IOW, if there is no problem, go out an invent one. Slate is quite good at that.
Boom. Spot on.
Exactly, Hube. It seems like there isn’t anything they’ll declare “racist.” So I’m “racist’ because my past girlfriends have been white like me? Even though I consider myself colorblind and would date a woman regardless of her race. Someone needs to tell Slate that it’s not 1955 anymore and that race relations have improved, although race hustlers like the writer of that article have make stuff up or otherwise they’d hit the unemployment line.
And good point about the double standard, Andrew.
Agree. If there were no racism (or poverty), the Left would have to invent it. Which is what Slate is trying to do.
Correct me if I am wrong but since I am white and I find Stacey Dash incredibly beautiful I am fine, but since I am married to a white woman I am a racist?
And to think I was taught to treat people by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin…..what were my parents (and MLK) thinking?!?!
Hilariously, I was once lectured by a (white) liberal about how being colorblind was “racist” and that the issues are “far more complicated by that, your white heterocentric patriarchal dogma blinds you from this truth. Even if you are willing to date a woman of color, you are doing so to hide your embedded racism.” Pure liberal academic gobbledygook right there. These clowns are beyond parody. I told him to get his mind out of the Gender Studies department and get help.
And yeah, Truth: I think Stacey Dash is incredibly beautiful, too. It kills me that regardless of your actual feelings, they’ll still label you “racist” no matter what.
Don’t panic, Carl; we can figure this out! (we are born to positions of power, how can we not figure this out?). So, if we each date, marry, have kids with a person of 100% color, our kids won’t be racist as they are the product of 2 non racists, who were the products of 4 racists. Now, our kids can date kids of biracial makeup making them completely non racist couples- however, two parents would be white, making their kids 1/2 racists, though 25% more likely to attain positions of power compared to pure non-racists but 25% less likely than pure racists…..that may be a problem, so let’s have our kids date someone of a solid non power position holding race, making their kids potentially non-racist but less likely to attain power……never mind Carl, we’re screwed!
This Slate article is the silliest thing ever written!
LOL, Patrick. It is a silly article, but it’s a dangerous one, too… many people sadly believe as the clown wrote it does and he’ll probably influence more LIVs to think that way. It’s like Hube said earlier in the thread: if there is no problem, go out and invent one. If they didn’t make stuff up, these race hustlers would be hitting the unemployment line.