Preference vs Discrimination

Quote by Ahabs
1) Should the term "Social" imply "non-play get together" (I assumed that was Munch, a described by SH guidelines) .. example, BBW social in a pub is non-play, yet BBW social in Chams CAN expect play.
I have always been under the impression that a social is non-playing. I have always been confused when I have seen "Socials" being organised in a club. I have expected that playing would be part of it as entrance fees would have been paid so how could it be a social.
2) Depending on above, should a "social" be open to all, irrespective of the group organising it, or should the type/style not depend on the organiser?
A social organiser can choose whatever criteria they want. Those not meeting it can be refused entry. It is the organisers right.
However there is a way to do this in a way that can make the refused person feel like shit or not. I organise socials and if someone applies that has obviously not read my criteria then I will Private Message them and explain why. I would not bring it into the public domain as this would then cause embarrasement all around.
3) If FoxyChick can feel "dejected" for being advised against a guestlist for black men and women/couples who DO want them (as she doesn't - but hey, its a "social") then surely I have similar right to protest to being denied attending a couples and single fems social for exactly the same reason?
The event was advertised without a strict criteria. It was very wooly and when I read it, it looked like an open invite. If it was a closed group then this should have been spelt out by the organiser. This is more a lesson in how to organise than peoples preference as people were just getting confused.
Swinging is never set in stone. What people dislike this week they may like next week. Using the "BalckGuys4Fems" group as an example, the guys and girls would get bored with each other if it was the same ones in there all the time. So new people going in or attending socials are essential for the group not to go stale. These new people do not just wake up and decide this is the only group they want to be in. They could see an advert and think they would attend to see if they may like it or what the fem and hubby have discusssed is it for them. By excluding them then the group is not going to keep going.
Your example of the couples and single fem social. If they had an invite that was open then yes you should be invited. If the criteria clearly stated that no single men were allowed then no you shouldn't. The "BalckGuys4Fems" social did not state no single white guys.
4) Does "attending socials, having a high forum post count or living in the Birmingham area" become a qualifying factor to being included on a "BlackGuys4Fems" guestlist?
The only thing it would have is give the organiser the insight that the person has been on site a while. Personally, it would let me ask the person apllying to come are they known by other people or do they frequent a single room or are they known in the forum. This would then give me the confidence, after talking to someone I already know that know them, that they are not idiots that will spoil the night or axe wielding nutters.
Post counts and how long people have been on site are just tools for the organiser to use.
Without ofcourse this suggesting likewise other "high-post-count, other-social-attending, birmingham residents also qualifying for the same.. whether or not they share/support the theme/preference of the group having the social anyway?
How do you know? This is where the swinging set in stone bit comes in. An individual may want to go to talk and see what goes on before he and his partner goes. Or it may just be a turn on for the white guy to see black men with white women, but they may not want to join in and just watch. There are numbers of other ways that people like to play and I wouldn't tell them that it isn't right (unless it is illegal).
Dave_Notts

Quote by Dave__Notts

Then why pretend this was something else?
The best place to have a debate is where it arose. It was and dealt with...........this is now just dragging it out.
If you really wanted to know the answer to this question then you would not have brought something different in that has nothing to do with the title. The differences of opinion on the other thread is about the use and understanding of language used on a forum and nothing to do with discrimination and choice
Dave_Notts
PS Writing in capitals does not make you right. It denotes shouting, and shouting is just plain rude

Quote by kentswingers777

PS talking about discrimination. This has made me think that there can not be anybody in favour of discrimination on the thread as this is aginst the AUP. Surely the first person who says that discrimination is ok would be banned . Kind of one sided discussion then

Quote by Dave__Notts

PS talking about discrimination. This has made me think that there can not be anybody in favour of discrimination on the thread as this is aginst the AUP. Surely the first person who says that discrimination is ok would be banned . Kind of one sided discussion then

Quote by kentswingers777

PS talking about discrimination. This has made me think that there can not be anybody in favour of discrimination on the thread as this is aginst the AUP. Surely the first person who says that discrimination is ok would be banned . Kind of one sided discussion then

Quote by meat2pleaseu
...... and black ( as in Caribbean, Asian et al ) just don't turn me on in general. Sounds harsh but it's MY preference......

Quote by kentswingers777
Sorry Davey, Was refering to his comments that have come out in the press this weekend.
You not read the papers?

Quote by kentswingers777
IF we said in our profile that we would not want any black or Asian guys to respond to our advert, would that also be classed as discrimination?
If it was then a lot on here would be showing racial discrimination......no?
Where does one draw the line on this? It has all got a bit silly really.
I was always brought up by my parents as " sticks and stones ", seems that has gone now.

Quote by DeeCee

IF we said in our profile that we would not want any black or Asian guys to respond to our advert, would that also be classed as discrimination?
If it was then a lot on here would be showing racial discrimination......no?
Where does one draw the line on this? It has all got a bit silly really.
I was always brought up by my parents as " sticks and stones ", seems that has gone now.

Quote by DeeCee
I think it could be classed as racial discrimination... in the same way that one could be seen to be discriminating against the fat and the hairy....

I dont think however that there is as much wrong with this sort of discrimination (as discrimination goes)... it is a fact of life and comes about because of peoples preferences.
Just because the preference and discrimination exists, I would add that this doesnt mean that a person with these views is an out and out racist or fatist etc... its just fact that they discriminate who might be of a different race, size, age show this discrimination through their thoughts and actions,
We all do it...
The stick and stones philosophy is a good one ... the "label" might not fit precisely and sometimes, on a personal level it might not even matter to a person that they do discriminate...in a "it is their choice... and if there are victims of that choice then so-be-it" type of way.
my personal view.... well, i admit that i can be guilty of types of discrimination in the choices i make on a number of levels....
If someone distorts this discrimination by amplifying the effects of it or by mis describing it and branding me xxxxxist.... then so be it...they are entitled to their opinion....and sticks and stones might break my bones... but names will never hurt me.

Quote by Ahabs

I think it could be classed as racial discrimination... in the same way that one could be seen to be discriminating against the fat and the hairy....

I dont think however that there is as much wrong with this sort of discrimination (as discrimination goes)... it is a fact of life and comes about because of peoples preferences.
Just because the preference and discrimination exists, I would add that this doesnt mean that a person with these views is an out and out racist or fatist etc... its just fact that they discriminate who might be of a different race, size, age show this discrimination through their thoughts and actions,
We all do it...
The stick and stones philosophy is a good one ... the "label" might not fit precisely and sometimes, on a personal level it might not even matter to a person that they do discriminate...in a "it is their choice... and if there are victims of that choice then so-be-it" type of way.
my personal view.... well, i admit that i can be guilty of types of discrimination in the choices i make on a number of levels....
If someone distorts this discrimination by amplifying the effects of it or by mis describing it and branding me xxxxxist.... then so be it...they are entitled to their opinion....and sticks and stones might break my bones... but names will never hurt me.

Time means nothing. Have you seen the state of this government and they have been going longer than 4 years

Quote by staffcple
Silk & Big G I have to say what a fantastic post.

Quote by Silk and Big G
Its all about the advertising .
If you are happy to define yourself, and promote yourself as a simple comodity then thats all you will represent. Just as a man that thinks the most important and alluring or appealing aspect of himself is that he has a ten inch cock should expect to be treated as no more than a cock with legs then a black man who uses his race as an advertising definition should not be upset when he is defined as simply that. Its not really possible to so specifically comodify yourself for the purposes of sexual conquest and then complain of the complex emotional and moral consequences. If you reduce yourself to a "sexual preference" then your human rights become kinda secondary . By the removal of your 'self' as simply an individual who may or may not be attractive for any one of a plethora of attributes - it makes it hard to argue the point on feelings.
Its not really useful making a comparison with smokers or fat or hairy people since such qualities in a person are never used as positive advertising by the individuals to whom they apply.
Of course we all experience some form of descrimination in our lives, but I cannot of course comment from the point of view of a black man. I can only imagine - and what I imagine is that having fought all my life against stereotyping and being misunderstood or descriminated against, the last thing I would want would be to be reduced to a mere "sexual preference" simply for the sake of more easily attaining sexual conquest. that for me would I imagine engender a basic feeling of lack of respect for me as a human being and as an individual - and as such I would avoid using any such methods as motivation for potential sexual partners.
Peace

Big G ........... Well said!
Sam xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Quote by Silk and Big G
Its all about the advertising .
If you are happy to define yourself, and promote yourself as a simple commodity then that's all you will represent. Just as a man that thinks the most important and alluring or appealing aspect of himself is that he has a ten inch cock should expect to be treated as no more than a cock with legs then a black man who uses his race as an advertising definition should not be upset when he is defined as simply that. Its not really possible to so specifically commodity yourself for the purposes of sexual conquest and then complain of the complex emotional and moral consequences. If you reduce yourself to a "sexual preference" then your human rights become kinda secondary . By the removal of your 'self' as simply an individual who may or may not be attractive for any one of a plethora of attributes - it makes it hard to argue the point on feelings.
Its not really useful making a comparison with smokers or fat or hairy people since such qualities in a person are never used as positive advertising by the individuals to whom they apply.
Of course we all experience some form of discrimination in our lives, but I cannot of course comment from the point of view of a black man. I can only imagine - and what I imagine is that having fought all my life against stereotyping and being misunderstood or discriminated against, the last thing I would want would be to be reduced to a mere "sexual preference" simply for the sake of more easily attaining sexual conquest. that for me would I imagine engender a basic feeling of lack of respect for me as a human being and as an individual - and as such I would avoid using any such methods as motivation for potential sexual partners.
Peace

Quote by Lucyandmike7
Were you on the debating team at uni Ahabs?

Quote by Ahabs
Were you on the debating team at uni Ahabs?

Quote by Theladyisaminx
Luck and ahabs I would like to say great points raised on both sides, these makes for a good read. Just how a debate should be conducted in my book.
I would like to ask something of Ahabs.
If as you are saying there are rooms as you mentioned.
Are these people not alienating others, that feel as we don't have the same set prefreance
My thoughts are if we met in another room that was open to all, we might just find another common intrest so could strike up a friendship from a different angle?