HISTORY OF INTERRACIAL RELATIONSHIP

[expatdad]

Shocked. Let's not bring religious prejudice and intolerance onto this website.

It is not unusual for any community to protect their own, and turn a blind eye to what happens to people from other communities and that applies whatever the ethnic character or religious beliefs of the community.

At no time in my post or in any of my posts have I referred to Hindu's Sikh's, Muslims, Christians, Chinese, Japanese, or Koreans for that matter and you have no right at all to twist my words to suit your own agenda. Take it somewhere else!

I lived 14 years in London and often stay there at the moment for weeks at a time so take your Londonistan comment, and it being a terrorist capital and stick it back up your arse where it presumably dribbled out of!

There is nothing wrong with 99% of Muslims whether they are British, Amercian, French, Pakistani, Indonesian or Arab!

Just as there is nothing wrong with 99% of Christians, Hindu's, Bhuddists or any other people of a religious perspective.

The triads are for your information are very active in the UK, but the biggest 'gang' problem is East European, or Jamaican, who are not Asian at all. I made no mention of 'gangs' in my post at all.

If you want to spout your hate prejudices don't bring my name into it.

I have no problem with your second paragraph which is far more sensible and based in the real world

 

[Sana Alam]

I agree with expatdad, whats with this religious bullshit?

how come a person from one religion is better than the person from another?

This kinds of low mentality and prejudicial thinking is what causing violence and intolerance in the world, and yet It shames me to see that there are people in the world still in this modern age who still think like that.

I dont give a ******* if hindus or sikhs are considered asians along with muslims ... newsflash, they are asians and they should acknowledge that. I dont think any hindu or sikh is better than any muslim or vice-versa. Nor I think any christian is better than a jew or a pagan is better than a buddhist.

People should not be judged based on religion. I think everyone has received that much school education to know this fact on their own.

 

[Peter Johnson]

 

[weaknfunny]

No. Fantasy may be there, but where the opportunity arises, and if any sort of culture of swinging takes places, or simply a woman being adventurous then it moves beyond fantasy into common practice.

My own estimation, and it is a rough crude estimation, was that 75% of expat wives and daughters went black within 3 months of arriving in Zimbabwe. Not all. I knew one woman, newly married, who was black pregnant a month after her arrival, and my own wife took six months before she went black, Just as I am reasonably certain some did not go black at all, but the sexual atmosphere was very high in Harare with 4 million men and only 500,000 women in the city 'opportunity' was the black male watchword...

I understand you and I find what you say reasonable. With all that I was talking about it's mental part. I mean what black men means in white people's mind. I know when the opportunity comes, they make this fantasy real and it doesn't sticks in the minds as a fantasy only. However you surprised me with your informations about interracial sex history knowledge. I just did not know that Africa has become an interracial sex factory.

 

[willsrvu]

Muslims do not have a problem with being identified under the Asian label, and you may not have a problem with it. ...
But Hindus and Sikhs do not like it, and people should not be labeled in a way they do not like.
.... But some take issue with that, especially Asians who do not fall under the subgroup that is really responsible. ....

Well finally someone who makes sense of all of it.
If you come from a place recognized as part of the Asian continent, but don't like being referred to as an Asian, you shouldn't be called an Asian, but whatever you prefer to be called instead.

Just because I was born and live in the United States doesn't mean I should be referred to as an American.

I think I should be called an African.
No, I've never been to Africa nor do I have even the tiniest bit of African ******* in my heritage as I'm as white as a piece of freshly floured pizza dough, but I think I would prefer that as it might sound sexier to women and what I prefer to be called is all that really matters anyway. Right?

 

[Peter Johnson]

As a point of fact, we are ALL of African descent. Unless of course you're one of those that thinks the world is only 4,000 years old.

 

[shocked]

Well finally someone who makes sense of all of it.
If you come from a place recognized as part of the Asian continent, but don't like being referred to as an Asian, you shouldn't be called an Asian, but whatever you prefer to be called instead.

Just because I was born and live in the United States doesn't mean I should be referred to as an American.

I think I should be called an African.
No, I've never been to Africa nor do I have even the tiniest bit of African ******* in my heritage as I'm as white as a piece of freshly floured pizza dough, but I think I would prefer that as it might sound sexier to women and what I prefer to be called is all that really matters anyway. Right?

There is a difference. You are not African and are White-American so you have no reason to be considered African. In the case of Hindus in Britain, they simply prefer to be identified by their religion and specific nation of origin (India) rather than their subcontinent. Its like Iraqi Christians who prefer to be identified as Assyrians rather than Arabs or Iraqis. Or German Jews who prefer to be identified as Jews or Ashkenazi Jews rather than as Germans. You are NOT African so you have no reason to be identified as such. But British Hindus, Sikhs, and Jains ARE what they want to be identified as.

 

[Sana Alam]

ok , lets say british hindus and sikhs are identified as hindus and sikhs , not as asians or muslims ... what is your point then ? are you trying to say hindus and sikhs are better than asians or muslims ? I can understand the pride in heritage thing, of course people should be called whatever they want to be called, but the point remains that all humans are equal. I do not think any white is better than a black, or a latin is better than an oriental, or a hindu better than any asian, nor vice versa. We all are humans, and we should not be bothered by what race or ethnicity , especially religion other people have. Morality and ethics are much superior, and people should believe them.

 

[Sally B]

so many silly distinctions. race is so superficial. extreme religion is a form of mental illness.

i distinguish between people of character and people bereft of it. i distinguish between selfish and charitable. i distinguish between good lovers and not so good.

of course, i distinguish between guys with nice ones and the rest nothing superficial about THAT

 

[shocked]

ok , lets say british hindus and sikhs are identified as hindus and sikhs , not as asians or muslims ... what is your point then ? are you trying to say hindus and sikhs are better than asians or muslims ? I can understand the pride in heritage thing, of course people should be called whatever they want to be called, but the point remains that all humans are equal. I do not think any white is better than a black, or a latin is better than an oriental, or a hindu better than any asian, nor vice versa. We all are humans, and we should not be bothered by what race or ethnicity , especially religion other people have. Morality and ethics are much superior, and people should believe them.

I only started saying this after expat dad kindly suggested that 'Asians' and their families did not have a problem with their boys forsing young white girls into *******. I wanted to make it clear that the good Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and Parsis are not involved in this. And yet their names have been tarnished by this term and they are livid about it. And yes I do have problems with Islam. Race is not a choice, but religion is. Any religion that says to ******* people of other faiths, marry children, and chop hands (and have many people actually practicing these things) is something I want no association with. As a community British Hindus are generally better than Muslims, if measured by criminal activity and human indicators such as literacy and income. They are far more integrated into British society and are generally on very good terms with their neighbors. British Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims are not. Both communities largely came at the same time with the same skill set (textile workers in the 1950s), but one community decided to make something of itself and one decided to blame its hosts while living off them.

Religion was the last thing on my mind, but when Expatdad made it a racial issue, I had to step in and remark that it is a matter of core values and belief systems that drive these horrendous acts, not color.

 

[expatdad]

I understand you and I find what you say reasonable. With all that I was talking about it's mental part. I mean what black men means in white people's mind. I know when the opportunity comes, they make this fantasy real and it doesn't sticks in the minds as a fantasy only. However you surprised me with your informations about interracial sex history knowledge. I just did not know that Africa has become an interracial sex factory.

Bear in mind that in most African countries the white population is very low, probably around 10,000 whites. Zimbabwe was quite different when we there the white population was around 200,000 hence the opportunities were much higher. However there were not large numbers of seriously wealthy Africans, probably less than a hundred, though with government officials in immigration and security with 'specialist' knowledge of the white community.

Some countries of course have high numbers of white tourist visitors but they are in and out of the country too fast generally for any. of course there are many white men and white woman, and indeed couples holidaying with an 'adventure' in mind and often the main city hotels are thronged with Africans looking to see if they can find such whites

SA has around 4 million whites and the sexual exploitation at times seems more organised.

 

[willsrvu]

As a point of fact, we are ALL of African descent. Unless of course you're one of those that thinks the world is only 4,000 years old.

Exactly the reason I made the facetious statement!

 

[expatdad]

Exactly the reason I made the facetious statement!

Interesting diversion from the thread. Bear in mind since the discovery that DNA has a double helix structure in Cambridge UK the theory of evolution has been debunked.

No scientist has been able to explain how we can evolve when our basic cellular building block has a double helix structure!

I don't suggest we start this as a thread. Want to learn more, do some research elsewhere

Your time would be better spent find a black lover for your wife

 

[Sally B]

the theory of evolution has no more been debunked than the theory of gravity.

 

[expatdad]

the theory of evolution has no more been debunked than the theory of gravity.

Then you need to read up on DNA and cell structure

 

[willsrvu]

There is a difference. You are not African and are White-American so you have no reason to be considered African.

"As a point of fact, we are ALL of African descent. Unless of course you're one of those that thinks the world is only 4,000 years old. " Apparently some disagree with you.

In the case of Hindus in Britain, they simply prefer to be identified by their religion and specific nation of origin (India) rather than their subcontinent. Its like Iraqi Christians who prefer to be identified as Assyrians rather than Arabs or Iraqis. Or German Jews who prefer to be identified as Jews or Ashkenazi Jews rather than as Germans.

That's all fine and dandy, however, when someone sees another for the first time the way they identify each other is first the visual and then the voice. These are only capable of telling one general information, the visual: (race) European, Asian, African, Latin, etc. and then the vocal narrows things by the accent. All that this tells anyone is the geographical identity.

Unless one is noticeably wearing something recognizable to others that identifies their religion, politics or other aspects, it wouldn't be of interest to most people unless they actually took the time to get to know each other well enough to decide if they need to hate each other or not because of foolish reasons.

Most of us don't really care that much because we don't wish to invest that much emotional energy in needless, unwarranted hate. We don't really recognize any difference between Asian Indians because of their various religions or ridiculous caste system anymore than we see a major difference between U.S. Americans that live in the various Northeastern states because of their religions or political affiliations or we can readily tell the difference between an Irish Catholic and an Irish Protestant.
My Wife and I are of differing politics, different religions and are from different geographic areas yet we found it easier to love each other than to hate each other because of our differences.

You are NOT African so you have no reason to be identified as such. But British Hindus, Sikhs, and Jains ARE what they want to be identified as.

Again, many maintain we are all African by descent, so I guess I can claim that just as easily as I could claim I am a Pole because my Grandparents were from Poland, even though I've never set foot in Poland. Maybe I should claim being Catholic instead because that was the religion I was born into, although I don't practice it anymore than I do any of man's institutions of worship.

You can insist all those Asian-Indians can claim they aren't Asians because they are Hindu vs Sikh vs Jain vs whatever and they happen to be in Great Britain instead of Brooklyn, Bangladesh, Nepal, Nagpur or Papeete.

Makes just as much sense to the majority of us.

 

[expatdad]

It is pretentious nonsense to claim you are something you are not.

Most of us are free to call ourselves what we like but that does not makes us any different from what you are.

Where your descendants came, from does not change what you are, what you want to be does not change what you are. Calling yourself something does not make you that something. If any thing it shows dissatisfaction and lack of confidence in yourself.

It is like those people who have no alternative but to work for a living but don't accept they are 'working class.'

It's all about perceptions, aspirations, wanting to be something other than what you are because you think people will think differently about you if you describe yourself as something other than what you are. It does not change what you are, no matter how much you want it too.

If you can't accept what you are that is your problem not other people's problem.

Indeed wanting to be something different and thinking that that is important, just makes you a victim of social paranoia and is the first step towards the magnifying the social danger of categorising 'others' as somehow being inferior or lessor people than you, and those people you want to be regarded as a group you want to 'belong to'

People will still think of you and judge you on your actions and behaviour irrespective of how you 'present' your image of yourself to them, and irrespective of what you call yourself.

 

[expatdad]

When your wife is being pounded into ecstacy night after night by a black man with a 9/10 inch thick cock you have all the time in the world to ponder the meaning of life...

 

[willsrvu]

...
Religion was the last thing on my mind, but when Expatdad made it a racial issue, I had to step in and remark that it is a matter of core values and belief systems that drive these horrendous acts, not color.

OK, my bad, I have apparently misunderstood the point you were making. You are correct that race has nothing to do with the acts described.

I would submit that even beyond core values and belief system, personal psyche is more the factor as many will seek to justify abandoning their professed core values and belief systems to get what they desire and create drama for those they are identified as being part of.

 

[willsrvu]

It is pretentious nonsense to claim you are something you are not.

Most of us are free to call ourselves what we like but that does not makes us any different from what you are.

Where your descendants came, from does not change what you are, what you want to be does not change what you are. Calling yourself something does not make you that something. If any thing it shows dissatisfaction and lack of confidence in yourself.

It is like those people who have no alternative but to work for a living but don't accept they are 'working class.'

It's all about perceptions, aspirations, wanting to be something other than what you are because you think people will think differently about you if you describe yourself as something other than what you are. It does not change what you are, no matter how much you want it too.

If you can't accept what you are that is your problem not other people's problem.

Indeed wanting to be something different and thinking that that is important, just makes you a victim of social paranoia and is the first step towards the magnifying the social danger of categorising 'others' as somehow being inferior or lessor people than you, and those people you want to be regarded as a group you want to 'belong to'

People will still think of you and judge you on your actions and behaviour irrespective of how you 'present' your image of yourself to them, and irrespective of what you call yourself.

So this discussion is apparently moot.
Just be who you are and don't tell anyone about where you're from, your heritage or anything else, so you can't be judged on anything other than your own actions.

Now we can get back to talking about sex!