• Digit@lemmy.wtfEnglish
    2·
    4 days ago

    white-only dating app

    Oh. Those exist?

    I don’t mind.

    I’d never use.

    But if that’s what some people are into, they should be free to have that.

    Helps preserve diversity, by having pockets of various “pure breeds”, contrast to all those favouring genetic diversity [in their romantic relations] and “hybrid vigour” [in their offspring]. Good to have both.

    Though one has to wonder how over populated with how distasteful of character such most attracts though. Like a friend says, if the colour of your skin is the main thing you’ve got going on, you’ve not got much going on. Content of character, innit. Better criteria.

    But who are we to decide for others who they’re to be attracted to. There are many other sites and services matching people of one criteria with another. Idealistically (perhaps naively), this (like for like) should be no different. If we deny them this, the worst will still seek it out, and curate it, bolstered by terrorised/terrorising poor-me victim narratives spurring on survival reflexes. As seems to have happened.

    Not sure such actions are a remedy. Likely to have them double down to worse. :/

    • Zamboni_Driver@lemmy.caEnglish
      25·
      3 days ago

      Haha Holy shit mate. What in the fuck is a “pure breed”. That’s such an insane take. Have you ever read a book before? Every human population has genetic diversity. Humans have been on this planet for around 300,000 years.

      I sincerely hope that you are a racist troll, otherwise the education system has let you down.

      • Digit@lemmy.wtfEnglish
        3·
        3 days ago

        fear quotes, dude.

        I sincerely hope that you are a racist troll,

        you hope differently from me.

        • nostrauxendar@lemmy.world
          5·
          3 days ago

          What does your first sentence mean in this reply? That the person you’re replying to should be scared of quotes?

          • Digit@lemmy.wtfEnglish
            3·
            3 days ago

            Oh, sorry, is the correct term now “scare quotes”? Websearches were stubborn to pull up a definition for “fear quotes”. But since you know scare and fear are synonyms… this should be in reach.

            I coulda swore “fear quotes” was the idiom. Maybe I’ve slipped along the 6th dimension again, and/or some vast retcon’s afoot. n_n

            Anyways, I used scare quotes to denote my distaste for that term, mocking those who are into that kind of thing, highlighting the implausibility of it (being “pure”).

      • Digit@lemmy.wtfEnglish
        4·
        4 days ago

        It was a Nazi-hub. You should mind.

        like I said:

        how over populated with how distasteful of character

        and

        the worst will still seek it out, and curate it, bolstered by terrorised/terrorising poor-me victim narratives spurring on survival reflexes. As seems to have happened.

        Not sure such actions are a remedy. Likely to have them double down to worse. :/

        if the colour of your skin is the main thing you’ve got going on, you’ve not got much going on

        [Edit: and…

        if the colour of your skin is the main thing you’ve got going on, you’ve not got much going on

        [which with a little extrapolation is also] meaning they’re on a doomed trajectory. Like is so often the case, we see those who are into that, are not the “superior genetics” they claim to be. … “When you reduce a family tree to a family bush, you just can’t hide as much underneath it.” – Minister to Londo, Babylon5.]

          • Digit@lemmy.wtfEnglish
            3·
            4 days ago

            No. Nazis don’t get to play in my internet.

            I’d rather they not succumb to being nazis, rather than try to out-authoritarian them preventing their access to internet by claiming the internet my own. Daryl Davis has shown us how.

    • Digit@lemmy.wtfEnglish
      3·
      3 days ago

      Boggles my mind why that got such a heavy downvote.

      … Surely you’re not all racists, disliking my critique of the content of character of racists.

      Was it because my choice of wording, it confounded my meaning, such that people mistook me as the racist??

      Was it because I outed the folly of prohibition, showing how it does not prevent, making it more malignant? Was that missed too? Or wasn’t missed, but disagreed with but without cogent counter-argument?