Why is it that every single guy I know gets slightly offended at the fact that I find black guys attractive and would date them?
They dont say that they are offended, but its apparent.
I dont know what happened, but I was with my guy yesterday and he asked me out of the blue if I ever went out with an Indian guy. LOL. Anyways, I say no but I saw some nice looking ones and that no race is off limits to me I've been with them all, and he gives this bewildered look and says "even black guys?" I said yes.
I dont know anyone who doesnt limit the race of people that they date. I'm th only exception, I like everything and I prove it because I go out with all sorts of guys, I've messed around with every color except for Indian dudes/South Asians. But you know what...I havent messed around with a Middleastern guy...I dont...think so...Actually I have to think about that one.
I dont know...people say that they dont descriminate, but deep down they do. If you are attracted to your own race, thats perfectly ok, but dont say that you dont discriminate and will go with anything, when its obvious you are attracted to a certain type.
People like to "act". But when it comes to sexuality...most people screen by race.
Maybe I'm the odd one.
I've met fine boys in every race...
Race don't matter to me. But viewing racist people spreading words of hate everyday I would say that's how people think everybody's a racist but it's not true. A lot of people are capable to recognize a nice person, no matter if he's black, yellow or brown. There are support for people suffering from racism but it's not enough. They have a thread for them on a decicated site
My whole thing about this is I don't really care...or it doesn't bother me....BUT
It's like I had a white female friend who is really hot...and she came to me one day and said this black guy at work asked her out....and I was like So...
And then she was like????????????
(She was sitting there waiting my answer...treating me like her big brother...so I had to answer....)
And this is what I told her...
Look, if you want to go to the dark side then do it...it's not like it hasn't been done before...just don't come crying to the home team if things don't turn out to well.
(she seemed a little confused)
So I added...look, there is a reason white guys go for Asian Chicks...they think they can manipulate them and take advantage of their submissive side. I think this is a generalization, BUT black guys who chase white girls are the same way, they don't tend to treat white girls to well in the end. So be careful.
She laughed and called me a racist....
I disagreed and basically told her that history doesn't lie.
Well, she told me to "fuck off"...because race is such a hot button topic that no one really thinks it through...
So, she went ahead a fell for that black guy and they dated for months and then she showed up one night pounding on my door...when I opened it she stood there a bloody mess...crying for retaliation...I just shook my head, as apparantly she forgot my words of advice...I don't care what you do...just don't come back crying to the home team when thing turn out badly...
Of course I took her in but never saw her again after that. But there was NO repercussion (not even by the courts...the dude got 6 months probation)...I mean, she didn't listen and played with her heart and not her head and she got what she got.
This "home team" sounds really strange to me. I believe that a majority of people, particularly men, think that way. Its kind of like laying ownership over the women of your race. Doesnt matter the race, white, black, asian, latin, whatever, there are men who think that way.Originally Posted by Guzzer
I will admit that I love men of all races but I have had seldom opportunity to date white men. Its not that I dont find them attractive, but I think they seldom find me attractive. Not because I am unattractive. I get attention from alot of guys...blacks and Latinos mostly, seldom whites. I have an ethnic lool, a J-lo booty..but its my white skin that attracts them like flies...that I dont know why.
When are you going to stop the ugly threads ?
Where exactly did you get these "historic" entries ?
About the main question I honestly admit I may not have the right profile to answer since I don't have any US-based experience since the only black Americans you meet over here are usually soldiers (or at least people in actions jobs or ricky jobs if you prefer) and I only dated one so I cannot talk about the social statistics about blacks in large numbers.
But I live in Germany and I can tell you strangers are originate from Arabian backgrounds (mostly from Turkey) or Eastern Europe, which is more a cultural difference than actual race. Border entries are mostly made with the Arabian immigrant profiles.
I wouldn't exclude a potential buddy based solely on racial features. I don't find Asian men attractive so I've never dated any of them but that's simply visual so I wouldn't consider it "racism" and that's why I did not make entries in this other teenbar thread about racism.
Most women I met who are exclusively into men of other racial features are more interested in the exotic, kind of like looking for a new partner profile, having something different from anybody else - which, in my opinion, is just as racist as not dating anyone based on race.
I think our dating patterns are as influenced by social background and education as they are by demographics statistics. To people from significantly different communities these entries patterns may appear racist since people simly do not understand/comprehend them and have a very different view on things.
Silly example : I'm British, seventeen years old and living in Germany. So naturally the majority of my partners are German. Still my brother keeps asking me why I don't date English men ... there simply are none. Yet he still living in England always fails to remember that.
race don' matter. hot is hot. skin colors aren't a problem. Seen girls from every nationality in my school I'de love to date
AIDS comes from Africa. I'd rather not take risks just to feed the anti-racism cause
The fact AIDS it originated in Africa doesn't mean all black profile immigrant have it. Statistics made it quite clear. They sent analytic actions teams not only in Africa but in other middle-east countries and they said it may be demonstrated in the future than Africa is not the only responsible country. America is the fattest country on the planet but it doesn't mean every of you guys weights more than your car. Sure, you make stupid posts. But, you are not all fat. Yes fat is a problem for us residents, but that's because of a few factors, like unemployment, and the total lack of recruitment financial help actions from the us government. Got no job, may as well pass the time eating a burger or make idiot posts on my friends teen forum
Sure, it came out rampant. It's because no one knew what they were dealing with, and no one knew the right thing to do to stop it and the right actions to find the root and kiil it. There's been entries from a lot of different medical authorities back then, but all they did was to collect numbers and make statistics. Now we know it, and the gay community is actually the social group with the lowest amount of HIV/Aids infection out of all the rest of our social groups, be they based on ethnicity or sexual preference or religion or geography or whatever other social division you can pull out of your deeply misinformed brain.
Yes, lots of drug users have HIV. Lots of drug users also can't afford to partake in social actions to clean up and they can't afford needles to inject their drugs in so they share or use them off the ground, and of course, get in deep shit.
Your threads reeked of condescending, preaching hate actions so that's what you got in return. Don't make posts using a stupied Nicolas Cage movie as a source of your information either, that's like taking a book about farms for toddlers and using it as a reference for starting your own. You wanna learn something ? Use the statistics like anyone else. Sure, the cow goes moo, but how the fuck do you raise it, feed it, slaughter it, and so on. Plus, Nic Cage is a crap actions movies actor anyways, but enough sperging about that.
These discussions about AIDS are really depressing
I don't know what to say to help these discussions and I usually shut up when they happen in school, but her in teenbar I will partake and I've done a search a found this :
I don't know who wrote that
The Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV statistics based) theory
Some other very controversial theories have contended that HIV was transferred iatrogenically (via medical actions and interventions). One pretty well publicised idea is that polio vaccines played a role in the transfer.
In his book, The Hill, the journalist Edward Veller says that HIV can be traced from the testing entries of an oral polio vaccine named Chat, given to about a million people in the Belgian Congo, Ruanda and Urundi in the late 1950s (Statistics about these numbers available on www.medicsearchnum.com). To be reproduced, live polio vaccine needs to be cultivated in living tissue, and Veller's belief is that Chat was grown in kidney cells while calorie burning actions were running. Taken from local chimps infected with SIVcmz. This, he claims, would have resulted in the contamination of the vaccine with chimp SIV, and a large profile of people subsequently becoming infected with HIV-1.
Many people have contested Veller's theories and insist that local chimps were not infected with a strain of SIVcmz that is closely linked to HIV. This actually went to court, and they asked for the statistics being deleted from the server and that any kind of condescending actions against Africa would be condemned. Furthermore, oral administration actions of the vaccine would seem insufficient to cause infection in the largest profile of sick people (SIV/HIV needs to get directly into the bloodstream to cause infection - the lining of the mouth and throat generally act as strong barriers to the virus).
In February 2000 the Wistar Institute in New York (one of the original manufacturers of the Chat vaccine) announced that it had discovered in its stores a phial of polio vaccine that had been used as part of the actions made for the program. The vaccine was subsequently analysed and in April 2001 it was announced that no trace had been found of either HIV or chimpanzee SIV. A second analysis confirmed that another race profile called macaque monkey may have kidney cells, which cannot be infected with SIV or HIV, were used to make Chat.
While this is just one phial of many, it means that the OPV theory and statistics remains unproven.
The fact that the OPV theory accounts for just one (group M threads) of several different groups of HIV also says that transferral must have happened in other ways too, as does the fact that HIV seems to have existed in humans before vaccine actions were ever carried out. More about when HIV came into being can be found below.
The Contaminated Needle threads and Theory.
This is an extension of the original 'hunter' theory root. In the 1950s, the use of disposable plastic syringes became commonplace around the world as a cheap, sterile way to take actions in administer medicines. However, to African healthcare professionals working on inoculation and other medical programmes, the huge quantities of syringes needed would have been very expensive. It is therefore likely that one single syringe would have been used to inject multiple patients without any sterilisation actions in between. This would rapidly have transferred any viral particles (within a hunter's blood for example) from one person to another, creating huge potential for the virus to mutate and replicate in each new individual it entered, even if the SIV within the original person infected had not yet converted to HIV.
The Colonialism Theory
The colonialism or 'Heart of Darkness' theory, is one of the more recent theories to have influenced all kind of discussions for that matter. It is again based on the basic 'hunter' premise, but more thoroughly explains how this original infection could have led to an epidemic. It was first proposed in 2000 by Jim Moore, an American specialist in primate behaviour, who published his findings in the journal AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses statistics.
During the late 19th and early 20th century, much of Africa was ruled by colonial power. In areas such as French Equatorial Africa and the Belgian Congo, colonial rule was particularly harsh and many Africans were forced into labour camps where sanitation was poor, food was scarce and physical actions worker demands were extreme. These factors alone would have been sufficient to create poor health in anyone, so SIV could easily have infiltrated the labour force and taken advantage of their weakened immune systems to become HIV. A stray and perhaps sick chimpanzee with SIV would have made a welcome extra source of food for the workers.
Moore also believes that many of the labourers would have been inoculated with unsterile needles against diseases such as smallpox (to keep them alive and working), and that many of the camps actively employed prostitutes to keep the workers happy, creating numerous possibilities for onward entries and transmissions. A large number of labourers would have died before they even developed the first symptoms of AIDS, and those that did get sick would not have stood out as any different in an already disease-ridden population. Even if they had been identified, all evidence (including medical records and statistics) that the camps existed was destroyed to cover up the fact that a staggering 50% of the local population were wiped out there.
One final factor Moore uses to support his theory in the last debate threads, is the fact that the labour camps were set up around the time that HIV was first believed to have passed into humans - the early part of the 20th century.
The Conspiracy Theory
Some say that HIV is a 'conspiracy theory' or that it is 'human-made'. A recent survey carried out toward any us resident profile in the states for example, identified a significant number of African Americans who believe HIV was manufactured as part of a biological warfare actions program, designed to wipe out large numbers of black and homosexual people. Many say this was done under the auspices of the US federal 'Special Cancer Virus Program' (SCVP based entries), possibly with the help of the CIA. Linked in to this theory is the belief that the virus was spread (either deliberately or inadvertently) to thousands of folks all over the world through the smallpox inoculation program actions, or to gay men through Hepatitis B vaccine trials. While none of these theories can be definitively disproved, the evidence given to back them up is usually based upon supposition and speculation, and ignores the clear link between SIV and HIV or the fact that the virus has been identified in people as far back as 1959.
It is likely that we will never know who the first person was to be infected with HIV, or exactly how it spread from that initial infected human profile. Scientists investigating the possibilities often become very attached to their individual 'pet' theories and insist that theirs is the only true answer, but the spread of AIDS could quite conceivably have been induced by a combination of many different events. Whether through actions, travel, wars, colonial practices or genetic engineering, the realities of the 20th Century have undoubtedly had a major role to play. Nevertheless, perhaps a more pressing concern for scientists today should not be how the AIDS epidemic originated, but how those it affects can be cured, how the further spread of HIV can be prevented and how the world can change to ensure a similar pandemic never occurs again.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks