Quote:
Originally posted by St. Charles
I usually agree with your posts, but I feel like you're falling back into the same trap, though. Race is basically a REALLY bad way to group people because there are so many possible looks and outcomes in those groups. So I kinda feel like to cancel an entire race is to almost ignore the real diversity that takes place in them.
|
All forms of articulating type is regressive. Most communication is laymen and generic. If someone says they're looking for a masc, tall gymngoer. I wouldn't assume it means that they can't possibly find attraction to other descriptions of people, but this is the narrow filter they've used to shortlist their ideal man. (likely knowing its not close to being 100% inclusive to all their potential matches). An example of this might be age limit on tinder. Mine is 29, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't go with a 32 yo if we clicked. I just use 29 to narrow down my search, since from experience 30+ yo are normally in a different stage of their life's and typically look aged beyond my preference.
Although from my experience strict visual descriptions are almost exclusive to Grindr. I've rarely ever seen anyone on tinder specify aesthetic requirements other than "must be fit/active/athletic" and "looking for similar". Grindr's lense is fetishized because it's all about sex. Daddys/Otters/Twinks are all fetishized terms.
The filtering by race is only an issue because racial politics is itself hugely present outside of dating & a sensitive matter & racism itself is of course responsible for the social climate in which people gain their "preferences" in.
To be clear I don't endorse anyone saying "No X, No Y, No Z", no am I saying that some peeple who say such things dont own racist views. But I don't think it's a racial crime to use race as a category to filter through 100s of potential sexual partners.