If I show a group of ppl two phenotypically different pictures of two men or women and ask them to point out to me which is attractive, they'll choose differently based on their opinion of what's attractive. Apply in a larger sense to humanity, and you'll get what we have here. It's where the saying beauty is in the eye of the beholder comes from.
Bahal said he was attracted to women of all races. That's not the case for everyone, or dare I say most ppl. My own tastes are more discerning. I find patterns in what I'm attracted to. That doesn't indicate any form of self-hate just bc they're sometimes not native to our origin, which is what you're arguing. Beauty goes beyond ethnic background, it's overarching.
That's because the original analogy never applied to you. You aren't specifically seeking others outside your community and don't have a pattern of disdain.
But you're still not getting where I'm coming from. There are still two reasons for human interaction (nature and nurture). If you aren't genetically disposed to something then it only means that through your life you developed that something. In much the same way you'd develop a taste for anime and romantic novels. But if you have an aversion
to your own kind then you had to have developed that too under the exact same logic. Which brings back the question of why and how did that go about?
Not sure why that's a tentative topic. Especially for Somali people who above all things have always been categorized by their beauty.
AA men who specifically rag on their women and exclusively date white women clearly display that paradigm so why aren't we calling a spade a spade? You can't fall on the subjective argument because the argument itself denotes the qualifications of what a subjective opinion is (i.e. Something developed through life). It's fundamentally flawed.
