Is it racist to only want to marry a white guy if you're black?

yes, very clearly.

however you could argue sexual preferences are an acceptable form of racism. Racism being 'acceptable' trips people up which is why you're confused about it.

>>16772454
nah, it's called common sense.

>>16772454
it is but there's nothing wrong about it

>>16772454
No it's totally rational. White guys are the best for raising families, producing good strong intelligent children, and having a stable, comfortable life in the middle or upper middle class.

I understand why people consider that racist but whatever they can fume all they want.

it's not racist to have a preference

No considering black men are far and away the worst husbands if they can even be assed to stick around. Abusive, angry, low income, etc. Asian men close second and while Asian men are usually more hardass and strict than Black men, at least you can rely on an Asian man pretty confidently and they're usually not abusive unless you really step out of line.

>>16772454
No, that's just your preference.
>>16772516
^this is racism.

>>16772570
>>16772516
what the hell is the difference?

>I want a white man

>I want a white man because all the other races are [negative traits]

>>16772570
>facts are racist

>>16772578
>asks what the difference is
>explains the difference

>>16772578
>I want a white man
>I want a blonde GF
>I want a tall BF
Preferences. Lumping people together and associating traits with them based on their skin colour or ethnicity is pretty damn racist.
>>16772581
They're not facts.

>>16772583
>They're not facts.
They are.

>>16772586
If you want your facts to be taken seriously then provide a credible source.

>>16772454

There are only two kinds of people in the world: racists and lying racists.

Bottom line, do what makes you happy, just maybe keep the whole "whiteys only" thing to yourself.

>>16772590
This happens every time it's brought up. You say this, then I dump 50 links of government statistics then you'll just brush it off saying "Not all of them are like that" or some bullshit. Not worth the time.

>>16772454
No, it's completely natural for women to only want superior, ie White, males.

>>16772582
>>16772583
preferences based on what.... ? The only difference is that you're not saying the racist part out loud. Preferring a race for unspoken reasons is no different than preferring a race for spoken reasons, you're just obfuscating it.

Literally, racism is discrimination based on race. Preferring white men is discriminating based on race. There's nothing wrong with it, but it's very literally racism.

>>16772598
By your retarded ass logic me only want to have sex with women is sexist against males.

>>16772598
it's not racism

>>16772598
>preferences based on what.... ?
Looks? You know, the thing that plays a huge part in how we choose our partner?
>>16772593
>hurr durr correlation equals causation
And yes, not all of them. You don't date the average black man, you date an individual. And an individual can be black, warm and caring, with a nice and stable job and no anger management issues or violent tendencies. So therenis absolutely no reason to care about these statistics when you're dealing with an individual person.

>>16772454
no you are just into white guys.

>>16772600
it is a sexist sexual preference, yes. It's in a technical sense, I'm not saying it's what's commonly understood as racism/sexism, moron, because it's perfectly socially acceptable to select your partner based on these things. Just because we accept (in fact, we EXPECT) people to select sexual partners based on their sex doesn't mean it doesn't fit the definition of sexism perfectly.

>>16772620
>And yes, not all of them
Even if it was 99.99%, you could say that. It's not a valid statement.

When a large chunk of them are a certain way you are not racist for reacting in kind.

>>16772626
>When a large chunk of them are a certain way you are not racist for reacting in kind.

that's precisely what bigotry is though. It's assuming all of X group shares a characteristic and pre-judging individuals based on those assumed traits.

Like, if I assumed you were the product of incest, that would be bigotry because not all stupid people are inbred.

>>16772624
This is why no one takes liberalism seriously anymore.

>>16772626
>Even if it was 99.99%, you could say that. It's not a valid statement.
Yes you could and it would still be true in principle.
>When a large chunk of them are a certain way you are not racist for reacting in kind.
You are for lumping all of them together, look at the individual, that literally solves all these "issues". Don't date violent and aggressive men, if so many black men are that way (as you claim) then it will affect them more and you'll be less likely to date a black guy. That's it, where's the issue? Why do you have to say " don't date ANY black men because X percent of them are terrible! ", why is that necessary?

>>16772643
>no response to point
>o-oh yeah? w-w-well nobody c-cares!

scintillating.

File: KANGZ.png (1MB, 896x2622px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 896x2622px

Niggers getting fucking blasted ITT

>>16772697
>that pic
Apex zozzle!

Shit so black women go for whites while blonde white bitches go fo black male dick? Good trade off Tbh

>>16772454
preferences for sexual and/or romantic partners are not inherently racist. there is nothing wrong with favoring certain physical traits over others when it comes to what you are attracted to. if i say i like women with long hair, that does not mean i hate women with short hair. if i say i prefer women without tattoos, that does not mean i hate everyone that has one. this whole trend of crying racist at every little arbitrary thing is so incredibly stupid. its like that one kid on the playground that gets butthurt at every little thing and then runs away crying, shouting "im telling on you!"

>tfw white washed black girl and no white husband to have a nice life with

>>16772725
white males go for that asian pussy

Naw it's just common sense.