(no subject)

[serene]

Some of the people who, according to this poll
(linked to the answers, but you can get to the poll from there),
wouldn't date me:

firinel, meb21, redbird, tenacious_snail

(In fairness, I think the ones who won't date pro-life people really mean
they won't date pro-life people who are also anti-choice people, and
wouldn't consider me to be pro-life, because I'm in favor of safe, legal
abortions, but still, I think of myself as being both pro-life and
pro-choice, so there ya have it.)

I think it's fascinating that as many people said they wouldn't date
Scientologists as racists.

(I'd consider dating the former, but not the latter, but then again, I'm
doing that same definition-sloppiness as above, because I think that white
people can't avoid being at least a little racist, and I'm dating four of
them, so I guess I mean "overtly and/or unapologetically racist" when I
say racist here.)

Comments

[juliansinger.livejournal.com]

I should friend Catamorphism. Good polls.

I'd date a Scientologist if the right Scientologist came along. (I mean, I doubt it, but you never know.) OTOH, I'd find it hard to date an active, aggressive racist/sexist (which is how I interpreted the question, since when most people ask that sort of thing they're not talking about the "this society is racist and sexist and homophobic and ableist" version of the definition.)

Which, you just said, but anyway.

[leback.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure *anyone* can avoid being at least a little racist--allowing, of course, that the *implications* of a person's so being depend heavily on the position their own race has in society's power structure. Ditto sexist, with same caveat.

Interesting poll; thanks for the pointer!

[baerana.livejournal.com]

I agree w/ your definition of racist, which is basically the same definition I use for sexist

I said I wouldn't date someone who was: racist, sexist, homophobic, someone who wanted kids, monogamous and attached (i.e., you'd be helping them cheat), younger than the age of consent (note: you can date someone without having sex with them)

I'm not going to help someone cheat, that's an easy one. As for someone who wanted kids, I wouldn't date them because it would be unfair to them, since I don't want kids and that will NEVER change. OTOH, if it were a poly relationship and they had kids w/ their other partner(s) then it could work. But not mono and long-term. And the age of consent thing, even if we weren't having sex, that would add so much complication to the relationship, it would be exhausting.

I think, though, the main thing about the religions is, if they are observant, they wouldn't date ME - I mean, sex or no sex, I'd think dating a bi, poly atheist would be a major issue for them.

[leback.livejournal.com]

I think, though, the main thing about the religions is, if they are observant, they wouldn't date ME - I mean, sex or no sex, I'd think dating a bi, poly atheist would be a major issue for them.

FWIW, I know multiple observant Protestants for whom this is not the case--some are bi and poly themselves, even. Their flavors of Christianity just don't get as much press as the scarier sorts. :-)

[firecat]

Eh, not all religions require one's observance to extend to converting one's dating partners or spice to said religion.

[mactavish.livejournal.com]

My definitions were similar to yours. Also, it took me a few reads to realize you didn't mean you'd date firinel but not tenacious_snail. :)

[krasota.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't date someone who was cheating and I'd probably not date someone who was asexual. At this point in my life, I'm old enough that I wouldn't consider those under the age of consent.

As far as the rest? It's hard to say. I've dated racists (and sexists)--it's hard not to do so when growing up in the rural Midwest. I draw the line at Klan members (and always have). Ditto for homophobes, though homophobia turns me off so much that I doubt I'd end up dating anyone who's homophobic these days.

My hard and fast rule? I won't date people who refuse to lay off perfume, soy, wheat, latex, and aloe while we're spending time together (and in the hours before).

Fortunately, none of that matters at the moment. I've got a lovely boy who loves me as much as I love him.

[kightp.livejournal.com]

You and I, on the other hand, appear to be a perfect match. (-:

I have dated a Scientologist. Hell, my mother was a Scientologist, and my brother still is.

[vito-excalibur.livejournal.com]

Pro-life really is the commonly understood term for anti-choice. I hate both pro-life & pro-choice as terms, but at least people know what you're talking about when you say them.

What do you mean when you say you're both pro-life and pro-choice?

White people can't avoid being at least a little racist? Please. It's not just white people. I only date people who are committed to doing their best to act like they're not racist. :) It's all I can get out of myself, it's all I'll demand from other people.

[serenejournal.livejournal.com]

1) I mean that while I am anti-abortion, I do not want anyone else to be denied an abortion just because I think that abortion is, in general, a bad idea and a tool of male oppression. A very unpopular view among liberals, let me stipulate.

2) Having spent a lot of time studying racism in academic settings, I am perhaps in the minority here in believing that racism (as distinct from racial prejudice, which I think anyone can have/exhibit) can exist absent the power to wield race-based power. Thus, I think it's unlikely, for example, that an African-American lesbian can be racist or sexist in any way that I find meaningful. Again, not a popular view, but currently my view.

[vito-excalibur.livejournal.com]

1) {shrug} I don't know anyone who thinks it's a great time & you should just go out & get one for fun. If we could agree on that it should be legal, we could start talking about why people get them, & what other options they might have, I should think. But it's true that I don't agree it's always a bad idea. Or even mostly (where by mostly I mean mostly among women who want to get abortions, not among women who are pregnant in general.)

2) No offense, but I think that this might stem from an assumption that white people are the only ones who have power to wield? This isn't always correct; in places where Hispanics, for example, are the largest minority group, Hispanic racism (and boy howdy can there be Hispanic racism, especially against blacks) can be a real issue. And even within the black community, for example, colorism (http://www.sptimes.com/2003/08/31/Columns/The_paper_bag_test.shtml), which I think it's ridiculous to deny is a form of internalized racism, is a problem.

[juliansinger.livejournal.com]

On part 2-- I tend to call that internalized oppression, rather than internalized racism.

And the general academician response to the Hispanic/African-American thing is that, at least in the US, that's still not /racism/, since they're all still enmeshed in the US system. That's a lot of people exercising their right to be bigoted and prejudiced at each other.

(I have some arguments with this response, but, well, anyway.)

[vito-excalibur.livejournal.com]

Then I would say the general academician response is ignoring the degree to which people other than whites do exercise power, including institutional power, in the U.S. My opinion, of course.

[juliansinger.livejournal.com]

Yah. When I'm choosing to use the proper terminology (which, often, I don't, because it makes communicating difficult at times), an African-American lesbian can be prejudiced and/or bigoted.

Racist and/or sexist? Not so much.

Blah blah blah racism equals prejudice plus power.

[vito-excalibur.livejournal.com]

Also, does that mean you would consider dating someone who held negative prejudices about people of other races, as long as she wasn't in a position of power? That seems kind of weird. :/

[(Anonymous)]

I hope you got that the "can" was supposed to be "cannot" -- I think you did.

And no, I wouldn't date anyone I see as having active racial prejudices, or who, when confronted with them, wasn't willing to work on eliminating them. Further, I find it impossible so far to even be attracted to someone who has what I see as fuckwitted attitudes about sex or race, regardless of whether or not I think they would qualify for the "racist" label.

To be clear: 1) I think someone can have racial prejudice without being what I would label a racist (likewise gender prejudice and sexist). 2) I think it's almost impossible to live in this culture without having some racial prejudice. 3) For me to get along with someone, it's *essential* that they not only understand this, but act like it's true, and like they want it to be better, not only in their lives, but in the world at large.

[vito-excalibur.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that seems pretty consistent with what I would expect of you. (Only good things, btw.)

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

2) huh? you believe racism can exist absent the power, but an AA lesbian can't be racist? there's got to be a negating modifier missing in the first part of the paragraph.

if so, that seems to me a bleeding-heart-liberal-white-american notion. :) if you want to make a distinction between institutionalised racism and racial bigotry, fine, but institutionalised anything isn't a white thing only; people all over the world have managed to be racist in this sense without any exposure to american mores and institutions. and if you base it on the institutional attitude, then it's a domain error to call all individuals of the ethnic group in favour "racist".

furthermore, how might an african-american lesbian not wield race-based power? does only one racial group have that power in any given nation? i don't see why, because there are many levels of power, and while power at the very top is hardest to escape per se (because one might have to leave the country), power anywhere in between, including at the bottom, might interfere with an average person as well, because not everyone has the ability to move, period. said lesbian could wield the powers of boycott and violence against korean immigrants in her neighbourhood, for example. that certainly has happened in the US (well, i don't know how many lesbians were involved). i think this is even more obvious with sexism, but maybe i've just experienced a lot more of it personally.

i think separating -ism from -ial prejudice is a concept worth caring about at a policy level, but it's not so useful when looking at the attitudes of individuals -- which is what matters when i consider "dating". (i don't date at all; that solves the problem neatly in a different way :).

[serenejournal.livejournal.com]

Sorry -- as I pointed out elsewhere, the "can" in the sentence you're referring to was supposed to say "cannot".

[redbird]

I was interpreting "pro-life" to mean "anti-choice", rather than, say, anti-death-penalty activists, or people who like animals better than robots, because that's what it usually means.

[serenejournal.livejournal.com]

Yes, but I am talking about pro-life in the sense of the abortion debate. I am anti-abortion, but I don't think anyone else should be denied an abortion just because I think abortion is, in general, a bad idea, and a tool of male oppression. (This, as you can imagine, was a VERY unpopular view when I presented it along with a friend at a Green Party national convention.)

[slinkr.livejournal.com]

Pretty much all the pro-choice people I've talked to about this have been pro-life in the sense that you're using it.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

really? most pro-choicers you've talked to think abortion is a tool of male oppression? i'd be hard pressed to come up with more than a handful of those in my circle of acquaintances. i certainly don't believe it.

i do think it's majorly irritating to have had anti-choice people steal the term "pro-life", so i am sorta with serene in wanting to grab it back. pro-life shouldn't just mean "allow each foetus be born", dammit, it should also mean to take care of those babies afterwards, and all too many anti-choicers don't invest much effort in what happens later. i'm greatly in favour of pushing that term anti-choice on them at every opportunity -- truth in advertising, and all that.

[slinkr.livejournal.com]

Not specifically the "tool of male oppression" part. But most pro-choice people I have talked to have generally characterized abortion itself in negative terms (bad/unhappy/difficult/tragic etc.) and agreed that it's better for women to try and avoid having to consider abortion by using appropriate contraception.

I agree with you about using "anti-choice" in place of "pro-life."

[queensheba.livejournal.com]

I didn't know what "cis-gendered" means.

cisgendered

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

having a gender identity or performing in a gender role that society considers appropriate for one's sex; ie, not transgendered.

[ailbhe]

I'm alarmed by the number of people who would never consider dating me just because I never graduated highschool or went to college. That seems like such a weird prejudice to have. Surely as long as someone is well and broadly educated, how they came by that is irrelevant?

[wild-irises.livejournal.com]

How sad for them. I don't know you, but I'll bet many of them wouldn't know that about you unless you told them ... they just think they can tell.

[ailbhe]

I wonder? I mean, a lot of my friends have PhDs - how many of them know I stopped attending school regularly at 15, and stopped totally at 17 when I got my first full-time not-summer job and my own flat?

[leback.livejournal.com]

I could see its being really hard for someone whose formal education has been a centrally important part of their own life to relate to someone who didn't have a similar background--perhaps all the more so because you manage to be perfectly well-educated without it. I think "life experience wildly divergent from my own" is a deal-breaker for quite a few people.

That said, I suspect that answer more often reflects assumptions (which are popular in the US; I don't know about in your culture) about the "type of person" who doesn't finish high school or doesn't go to college. You make a splendid counterexample to those assumptions.

[wild-irises.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. I always get hung up on that distinction between "somewhat racist, as is more or less inevitable in this world, and working on it" and "actively and unapologetically racist." And I also think it's kind of like the distinction you're making about abortion.

I don't think I'd date an active and unapologetic racist, and I don't think I'd date an active and hard-line pro-life person, especially if they were given to standing in front of Planned Parenthood with bloody pictures of fetuses.

But you never know what else they would have going for them, or how things would pan out. If I took that poll, I'd have to check the "none of the above" box. But, my oh my, the trade-offs would have to be pretty seriously good for a couple of the choices.

[firecat]

As for "pro-life", let's just say I would not have potentially procreative sex with someone who would be miserable if I got pregnant and chose to have an abortion. (I'm almost certainly sterile at this point, but still.)

If "monogamous" meant "and wanted me to be monogamous," I would do my best not to date them. Also, I do my best not to help people cheat, although I don't have a perfect record in this regard.

I'm also very cautious at this point about dating people much younger than me.

As far as the rest of them are concerned, whom I have and have not dated may provide more useful information about me than whom I claim I won't date.

Have dated:
white
African-American
Protestant and observant (assume "observant" for all the religion options) (serene, after I said I never had, I thought of someone who qualified)
Jewish
Hindu
Buddhist
Wiccan
pagan
agnostic
atheist
religious, but not belonging to any particular sect
cisgendered male
cisgendered female
genderqueer, female, doesn't wish to modify their body
pierced (somewhere other than ears)
tattooed
heterosexual
homosexual
bisexual
racist
sexist
homophobic
Democratic
Republican
Green
Libertarian
a Nader voter in 2000
a believer in astrology
someone who'd never graduated from high school
someone who didn't go to college
someone who'd never graduated from college
someone with a physical disability
someone with a diagnosed mental illness
overweight
underweight
unusually tall
unusually short
pro-choice
someone who already had kids
someone who wanted kids
someone who didn't want kids
monogamous and single
monogamous and attached (i.e., you'd be helping them cheat)
polyamorous and single
polyamorous and attached (i.e., their partner(s) would know about you)
younger than the age of consent (note: you can date someone without having sex with them)
above the age of consent, but much younger than you
much older than you
vegetarian
omnivorous
geeky

[epi-lj.livejournal.com]

There's a good chance that I wouldn't date people of some religions that I didn't check off. I would feel uncomfortable dating a practicing member of a religion that barred that person from dating me, even if they decided to ignore the rule. Unfortunately, I don't know the "Who you're allowed to date," rules for Muslims, so I checked them off as being undatable for me. Other people... pending. I don't *think* RA is barred from dating atheists. If so, then... um... I guess I'll be happy with blissful ignorance there. clawfoot and okoshun are both of either no religious stripe or completely homebrew, so no worries on that front.

I don't think I've ever encountered any sign of racism in several white people I know, so that part of the post confuses me a little. I mean, if there's no noticable sign of racism, on what level can someone decide that they must be racist if they're white? (And in what sense is that itself not racism?)

[stonebender.livejournal.com]

I think it matters what people think a date is. If date means go out to an activity with someone. That's a pretty big group for me. If date is a euphemism for "having sex with". That's a different, smaller, group. Then if date means going out with someone to see if they could be a potential partner. That's an even smaller group.