Ins't discrimination is a part of human nature.
Why is racism seen as bad?
We judge people based on their physical qualities all the time. women aren't told they're bad people for not being attracted to short, hideous males yet disliking someone for their race or skin color makes you a bad person even though skin color is just another phenotype of the many we judge people for.
No one likes /pol/. Go back
>>>/reddit/
why should anyone listen to a frogposter? they're all retards.
did you even read the image you posted, or do you not understand how implications work?
>disliking and not liking are the same thing
Because discrimination also allows us to discriminate against racists and retards.
No one likes you; kill yourself.
I'm a black guy.
i just thought how hypocritical of me it was to judge people based on physical qualities they have no control of yet expect i not be judged for a particular physical property of mine.
How do you reconcile these facts?
>us
lmao
social anti-architecture
i don't argue with blacks or frogposters, sorry. i noticed they're all stupid.
Discrimination is only bad when whites do it. When any one else does it it's just muh culture.
Are you related to this guy?.
>says the /pol/nigger masquerading as a Veeky Forumslon.
>IQ
>No control of
le falseflag memefag
Didn't think there'd be that many shitposters this late at night.
A lot of things are natural. Part of what separates humans from animals is our ascension away from animalistic behaviours, especially when those behaviours are defence mechanisms of species that struggles to preserve itself.
We like to eat sweets and fats and it's only natural to realise that there is little chance for starvation and therefore deviate from that behaviour.
We tend to ostracise weaker individuals, but we realise they won't really drag us down.
We latch on power and superior authorities, but their protection is not necessary and people start to realise that
Humanity is still a teenager. We're going through the ends of the edgelord phase. We'll grow still.
being racist is actively going out of ones way to harm another based on their appearance where as not being attracted to someone because of their appearance doesn't harm them
Not being attracted to someone and disliking them are different things.
Disliking someone based on skin color isn't racism, discriminating against them is.
Your definition of discrimination seems a bit weird to me.
So it's perfectly okay to treat someone differently based on physical properties they have no control over except when it isn't?
A woman not liking short males and treating them less favorably than tall males is ok.
A woman disliking men with facial flaws they were born with and treating them differently because of it is ok.
You actively discriminating against people based on their appearance and status is ok
.
You probably don't actively try to befriend hobos or go out of your way to try to seduce extremely ugly females, and no one thinks your a horrible person for doing so, you discriminate against people all the time, why do you believe it is not okay in some cases?.
Would you define a man that doesn't hire blacks because he simply isn't attracted to them and finds them visually unpleasing so doesn't like them near him as not racist?
Rape is also part of human nature. It doesn't mean it's right. Your argument is a naturalistic fallacy. Natural != good.
Stop being rude.
You're confusing preferences over racism and other types of discrimination. Also a lot of things you mentioned are not deemed to be ok.
wtf? i hate egalitarianism now.
Where did i say natrual == good?
Good isn't an objective idea in the first place.
if you ask the rapist how much he's enjoying free puss he'll probably tell you he's enjoying it a lot.
what you said is no different from saying "just because something is natural doesn't mean it fit's the definition of a word that encompasses societal norms we've accepted and are in some cases are jailed for breaking"
What if i prefer that people of a specif race be killed? would it not be racism because it's just a preference?
>A has better grades than B, I'll hire him
Preference.
>A is a gook, B is a nigger, I'll hire A because I hate gooks less.
Racism.
Not frog poster but I'm not too sure rape can really be seen as black and white. The large portion of women have rape fantasies so you would say that raping such a woman would be a good thing, Natural doesnt mean good but it also doesnt mean bad.
This is a weak strawman, the question he asked was based on uncontrollable physical characteristics.
all other things being equal
>A is taller than B. dates A (preference)
>A is a gook B is a nigger. I'll date a because niggers are dangerous(racist)
>Where did i say natrual == good?
You implied that by asking why racism is bad if it is part of human nature. The natural part of racism is clearly what prompted you to question if it isn't good after all.
>if you ask the rapist how much he's enjoying free puss he'll probably tell you he's enjoying it a lot.
You know the answer if you ask the rest of the society whether what the rapist did was good or bad. That's how you define if something is good.
>A has better grades than B because he's more intelligent, which is something greatly attributable to your genes.
>B is black,A is white. all things being equal i prefer A because A is white, skin color is a quality largely attributable to your genes.
A and B both have genes that result in them having physical qualities that either make me act more or less favorably towards them,
Why is it okay to discriminate on the basis of intelligence but not skin color?
Even if having rape fetish justifies rape (it doesn't) how do you know if the woman you rape has it?
I asked why particular forms of discrimination are ok while others are not despite the fact that their basis are the same, physical qualities you have no control of.
>A is taller than B. dates A (preference)
If you're solely judging someone based on height i.e. you think his intelligence, personality and everything else is solely based on his height then yes, you're discriminating and that is not deemed ok.
Grades isn't an insurance of intellect. The point of my argument with that example was that you judge people based on metrics that matter in a certain situation. In my example that was grades for whatever imaginary job. You can hire either of them but you prefer someone who has better grades because that's the superficial metric. You can always go back and offer B the job if A turns out to be shit. Hiring or choosing not to hire someone over skin color is racist because you're involving a metric that makes no objective difference.
They're not.
The post you are responding to speaks about job discrimination. I think hiring someone with better grades would be the more logical choice while hiring based on skin color would be discriminatory since its unlikey that skin color would be a factor in the employees ability to perform task.
Unless they were an arctic sniper or something lel.
If i hire a person with 130 IQ over a retard am i intelligist?
I hired the intelligent person over the retard because the retard had physical qualities that he is not responsible for that i don't prefer.
What exactly is the difference between this and hiring a white person over a black person on the basis that i prefer employs with white skin?
says the faggot who doesn't even have a bachelors degree.
>If you're solely judging someone based on height i.e. you think his intelligence, personality and everything else is solely based on his height then yes, you're discriminating and that is not deemed ok.
I said all other things being equal famalam. If the only difference is height then it should be seen as a preference which I think is fine.
Not the person you are responding to. Does the color of their skin affect their ability to do the job?
Sorry, misunderstood your post. I agree with you.
Lets say a person is faster than a different individual and i hire them instead of the slower individual.
Did i discriminate against the slower guy?
Lets say i hire a white person because they're white over an equally qualified black person.
Did i discriminate against the black guy?
Is it okay to judge people based on physical qualities they have no control of or not?
if yes than wouldn't having a black skin color or any other be just another physical quality that people can judge you by, positively or negatively?
Why is it particularly special enough to deserve a name yet all the others don't?
It doesn't have to.
>Lets say a person is faster than a different individual and i hire them instead of the slower individual. Did i discriminate against the slower guy?
No.
>Lets say i hire a white person because they're white over an equally qualified black person. Did i discriminate against the black guy?
No.
>Is it okay to judge people based on physical qualities they have no control of or not?
No.
Yes
>Lets say i hire a white person because they're white over an equally qualified black person.
>Did i discriminate against the black guy?
Obviously. Not hiring someone solely based on race is not only discriminating but also retarded.
Come back when you realize that humanity is doomed and you should just move to the mountains and live in a cabin without any electricity while mailing homemade bombs to universities.
the only retard here is you, you braindead brainlet, jew-brainwashed cuckbrain millennial gay anal homo guinea retard low-IQ low-energy low-test beta buck cuck UCLA brainslave to worldwide judeo-cuckoldian broadbrain infoslavery and to the KING JEW, antichrist on earth, ((((((Toby Fox)))))).
>correlation implies causation
>being racist is actively going out of ones way to harm another based on their appearance
No it's not because of their appearance, but their nature. Take a trip to Africa or a black neighborhood and this notion that all races are equal will disappear
Not wanting to mate with someone because they're ugly and disliking someone because they're ugly are different things, also the fact that something is our 'nature' doesn't necessarily justify it, by that same logic rape and murder could be justified.
wow, you ought to patent that computer and internet connection that runs without electricity
MOOOOOOODSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
THERE IS NO MAAAAATHHHHH
NO SCIENCEEEEEEEEEEE
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
So what I've gotten from this thread is it's okay to judge someone based on their race as long as it's not the only thing you're judging them by.
>Irrelevant Info: The Post
>Where did i say natrual == good?
You anticipated your question of why racism is bad with, "isn't it part of human nature?" If you don't think something being natural has bearing on it being bad or good, then that line is a total non sequitur. It's very clear why you prefaced the question the way you did.
>No it's not because of their appearance, but their nature. Take a trip to Africa or a black neighborhood and this notion that all races are equal will disappear
Except Africa is nothing like your neighborhoods. Blacks are violent in america for plentiful of reasons, their suposed (((nature))) is not one of them.
You're right in that saying "hurr racists are evil" is basically brainwashing intended to combat racism.
Of course racism and discrimination are part of the human nature. Hopefully, we live in advanced societies where the dark parts of human nature are being prevented to do to much harm.