21–29 of 29 posts
So the author thought, "I'll make an article about pro/con lists", but he thought he'd make it sexist and racist while he's at it. That's hilarious. Couldn't you pick something less controversial, like say, comparing religions, political parties or sports teams?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is nothing sexist or racist about this article, unless you believe that stating a black person is black is somehow offensive towards black people.
Actually, he marks black as a "pro" which is an almost hilariously mathematical form of racism.
So the author thought, "I'll make an article about pro/con lists", but he thought he'd make it sexist and racist while he's at it. That's hilarious. Couldn't you pick something less controversial, like say, comparing religions, political parties or sports teams?
Those are strange examples of "less controversial." A "less controversial" topic of comparison would be boxers vs. briefs. EDIT: I'm bad at sarcasm detection.
I'm somewhat amused that both women get +1 for great legs and both get 0 for "not letting me work", heh. It's also interesting that white Svetlana gets +1 for being smart, while black Elise gets +1 for being black but isn't smart. Interesting little Freudian slip (is that the right term?) there, I guess. I also agree with other commenters that introducing sex/race into this discussion seems completely unnecessary. A…
I'm somewhat amused that both women get +1 for great legs and both get 0 for "not letting me work", heh. It's also interesting that white Svetlana gets +1 for being smart, while black Elise gets +1 for being black but isn't smart. Interesting little Freudian slip (is that the right term?) there, I guess. I also agree with other commenters that introducing sex/race into this discussion seems completely unnecessary. A…
Law of small numbers - with only 2 examples, you have to cram lots of possibilities in there. The author envisions two people he might date, and a variety of possible attributes. So he would date someone if they were smart or not, exciting or not, black or not. But probably not someone fat. The whole exercise is an exploration of what the author thinks of himself and has nothing to do with actual women.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, he marks black as a "pro" which is an almost hilariously mathematical form of racism.
Like many people, I hold certain aesthetic preferences. You can call me racist while continuing to prefer blondes to brunettes if it makes you feel good about yourself.
Aren't we, like, not supposed to do this kind of thing anymore?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Law of small numbers - with only 2 examples, you have to cram lots of possibilities in there. The author envisions two people he might date, and a variety of possible attributes. So he would date someone if they were smart or not, exciting or not, black or not. But probably not someone fat. The whole exercise is an exploration of what the author thinks of himself and has nothing to do with actual women.
Yep. Totally get that. We've got a long way to go...