en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/3593295 Comments by Mike12157 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-81/#IDComment231976098 As someone who was raised Catholic, attended a private school where religion was part of the daily curriculum and attending church was required multiple times a week, I have always found the argument that God supports the war (or any war, really) to be completely asinine, baseless and honestly retarded. I’ve read most of the Bible and it does not actually suggest anywhere that God wants anyone to violently push their views or beliefs on anyone else especially in a way that will kill those people therefore not making their religious views relevant in any way. It is known that Christians are encouraged to spread the word on their religion and promote the values it teaches but it does not say “go kill people who either disagree or refuse to conform to what you want whether they are a threat to you or not” (the Bible actually says to never kill or harm others). That was a complete fabrication long before the Crusades and has somehow continued into the present day. Anyone who actually believes it or supports it should be placed in an institution and have their sanity checked or be required to go to school again because they clearly don’t have any reading comprehension skills or common sense. I don’t care how this sounds but a person has to be a moron to believe that or really not actually care about anything they say they preach and support. How anyone could believe this when there is all the evidence in the world proving the opposite is beyond me. And the most ironic part is that these people who actually support this idea are playing the role of the exact people they are killing and labeling as the enemy. They are trying to force a religion on others who do not want it and are usually not even the threats themselves. These are the Christians that are radicals in their own way and just as bad as the people they say they are trying to change or get rid of. I think it even makes me feel better that most of the people who say this crap are aware that it is a lie and only care about oil (or other resources in the past) because at least that makes sense. The people who really believe violence and death is what God wants are truly retarded. Overall, this is an embarrassment to me because I grew up with this religion and began to believe in it but once I started learning about the truth in the world I abandoned it because it is hypocritical garbage. No God, especially the ideal ones we create, would ever want something like violence or war. That goes against everything they promote and I really don’t get how people could be dumb enough to believe this view is true. They are the people the world could easily do without. Sat, 3 Dec 2011 04:32:08 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/29/voices-from-the-classroom-81/#IDComment231976098 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/15/voices-from-the-classroom-76/#IDComment227476993 If I was a victim of sexual abuse, I think it would take a lot for me to speak up. I have thankfully never had to deal with this personally so I cannot speak from experience, but I do know someone who was once a victim and have seen how hard it is to say something and seek help. I did however get the chance to speak with a child abuse expert recently and after talking to him about how rare it is for someone to come forward and also talk about why, I believe I have a much better understanding on the issue. One thing that is really important is the age of the victim. A very young child will most likely not speak up on purpose because they will either not be aware something is wrong or they will listen to the abuser who told them not to speak up or something bad will happen to them. The younger the person is, the more likely they are to believe that. A young person may reveal the truth accidentally because they have much less of a filter on what they say so that is really their best chance. When looking at children who are a little older, I think I would be in the majority of those who do not speak up if being abused. For starters, if the abuser threatened me if I were to say something I would probably be afraid of them hurting me even more and therefore not say something. I think I would need a lot of support or for someone else to come forward before I did. If I heard of another case where a child was abused and that they found out and stopped it from ever happening again, I would of course feel more comfortable and safer telling someone that I was also a victim. I also think I would need to have a strong and supportive family, which thankfully I do, so that I would know there would be people there to back me up if I did say something. I think it would also help if there was some sort of program in schools that educated children on child abuse and encouraged them to talk to someone if they were a victim. The more people there to support a victim and a child, the more likely they are to find the courage to say something. The one problem with this plan would be if someone close in my family was the abuser. If that was the case, I’m not sure if I would ever be able to confide in someone enough to tell them the truth until I became a little older (possibly a teenager) and realized exactly what was going on. I’ve seen firsthand someone I know be a victim of child abuse and not actually say anything (the person was caught without him telling someone) so I can’t say for sure I would speak up. Sat, 26 Nov 2011 04:47:49 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/15/voices-from-the-classroom-76/#IDComment227476993 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/10/voices-from-the-classroom-72/#IDComment220738176 I think there are a few reasons why people are so quick to pass judgment on any situation. The biggest factor and most important one is the severity or sensitivity of the situation being judged. When looking at the current scandal here at Penn State this is pretty easy to see. This was such a tragedy and disgrace that the news quickly spread and eventually most of the country knew what was going on here and what had gone on here in the past. Because it was such a terrible thing, even though there are only allegations at this point, people are quick to speak their mind and condemn those who might be (and probably are) guilty. Plus, when one person forms an opinion and judges someone or something, others follow suit. Everyone needs to have an opinion on everything these days. Withdrawal from a debate or conversation or refusing to answer question is looked at negatively. Even on small scale things we are quick to pass judgment because that is how we form opinions that frame how we approach a situation. We always have reservations or ideas when entering a situation or starting a conversation and they affect how we handle ourselves. I am not saying this is right, but it is pretty hard to enter any situation without any judgments or ideas of any kind. We judge because it is our instinct and our nature. People judge others because they want to be included and that is why when one person makes a judgment others will do the same. This is especially true when someone important makes a judgment and people who flock to and follow that person will adopt the same opinions and judgments. Then in situations where media is shaping an opinion (like they did with Penn State this week) and promote it to the masses, people will make their judgments without even think about it. There’s also the fact that people like to pretend they know everything all the time and are qualified to make an informed decision whenever they want. People just assume that they have all the facts and can make a judgment or opinion about someone and the worst part is that once they form this opinion it becomes so much harder to change even if new facts are provided to them. That was unfortunately very clear this week when the facts of the Sandusky case were not accurately reported by everyone and people were given wrong information. Even afterwards when people try to give them the real facts, they either ignore them or say the new information doesn’t matter. People feel entitled to judgments and most try to make them as soon as possible in an effort to not seem ignorant, but often times it has the effect they were hoping to avoid. People like to have opinions and to act like they know it all and are superior to others which is all part of why they are quick to pass judgment. Sat, 12 Nov 2011 04:53:19 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/10/voices-from-the-classroom-72/#IDComment220738176 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/01/voices-from-the-classroom-20/#IDComment216960549 I honestly do believe that all immigrants should at least try to learn English. I don’t expect them to master the language and necessarily become fluent but I do feel 100% that they should at least try and I don’t believe that belief will ever change. I know it is not easy to learn English and that it is very time consuming but I still expect that effort to be there. If someone wants to come to this country and expects an equal opportunity when it comes to jobs or anything else, then they should be prepared and willing to learn the language that is spoken by most people here. It makes everything easier on everyone if there are fewer communication issues and it would go a long way for immigrants if they could speak English. The number of possible jobs they could get would skyrocket because no employer will give a job where communication is absolutely necessary to an immigrant who can speak, whether legal or illegal. Granted, there are some people who might try to save the money but the communication breakdown and issues would ultimately harm their business and not help it and these people are the minority. People who speak English are respected more than those who do not and I am completely fine with that. Again, I’m not expecting every immigrant to become a perfect speaker of English and have it sound like their native language but I will respect them more and be more willing to work or be involved with them in any way if they speak my language. English is the official language in the United States and though many people do not speak it they should. It would make everything so much easier and would eliminate many awkward situations and problems. I know there is an argument that people who speak English and have lived here their whole lives should attempt to learn Spanish to become bilingual and be able to communicate with the largest minority of people who speak a different language but frankly I think that is bullshit. It is the immigrants who are traveling here to America to take jobs and make a living and I don’t have as much of a problem with that as some other people. I do believe however that if they are coming here for those reasons then it is not too much to ask of them to learn how to speak English. It would eliminate so many problems and would lessen the tension and probably racial conflicts as well between the immigrants and the native people who already speak English. It is very much a territorial issue and it is always better for the newcomers to adjust to the old ways. If you want to come to America, learn the language that most of its people speak. And again, the argument that not everyone does or that more people speak Spanish is crap. Everything important here is done in English by people who speak it and there is no argument against that. Fri, 4 Nov 2011 20:38:21 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/11/01/voices-from-the-classroom-20/#IDComment216960549 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/27/voices-from-the-classroom-57/#IDComment213693780 I think the idea of giving land back now to the indigenous people is ridiculous and simply not possible. There are so many reasons that this would not work. For starters, the logistics would never work out. There is just no way this is feasible. Everything is so different now than it was hundreds of years ago and the number of people has drastically changed. To give land back to indigenous people, who did not actually own any of the land in question because their ancestors did, would require it to be taken from someone who currently owns the land and probably worked hard to earn it. It is very unfair and not to mention illegal to just take their land and give it to someone else simply because the land was taken from their people hundreds of years ago. It would also create more problems than exist right now because the people that have land taken from them to be given back to the indigenous people would be in the same situation not having land. We cant just tell American citizens to pack up and leave their land in order to satisfy the indigenous people. Many Americans have worked hard for their land and have spent their entire lives to build the best possible lives for themselves and that simply cannot be taken away just to settle an old dispute that dates back centuries. And while it was very wrong of the settlers and Americans to force the native people to leave their land, all of those people are now dead and nobody that is alive today had anything to do with that. Similar to white guilt, the people that live and own land today should not feel that bad for the indigenous people who dont have land because they did absolutely nothing wrong. Also, the odds are that their ancestors had nothing to do with it either as most of them had not yet migrated to America. People now are not responsible for what happened then and to ask them to be is pretty asinine and illogical. It is unfair to ask people to give up what they have worked and lived for just to make up for something that, although it was wrong, was done by other people hundreds of years ago. Everything is also different now than it was then. Land has been developed and built on. There are houses, offices and many other types of infrastructure that have been built on the land that used to belong to the Native Americans so giving it back to them now would give them more than they had. Also, though it was wrong to force them to flee the land, Americans now legally own that land and are entitled to it while the Native Americans were just here first. It was still wrong to take the land, but it belongs to others now and forcing them to leave now is wrong and near impossible. Sat, 29 Oct 2011 02:14:54 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/27/voices-from-the-classroom-57/#IDComment213693780 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/20/voices-from-the-classroom-51/#IDComment210787838 I never look at a person who hangs out with people of a different race as a “poser” but I can definitely see how or why people make that assumption. It partially depends on how we are using the word poser and in what context. Some people use the word too liberally without really understanding it. To me, a poser is someone who does something that they might not necessarily want to just to fit in with a certain group of people or groups of people. They are acting or putting on a mask of sorts trying to literally pose and be included with other people. So, it is possible that a person could be a poser when hanging out with people of a different race. However, if someone is genuinely friends with people of a different race and spends time with them because they want to then they are in no way a poser. There are sometimes situations where a person can only be friends or hang out with people of another race, be it because of location or occupation or anything like that. They are not posers if circumstances allow nothing else and again, even if it is a choice then it doesn’t necessarily make them a poser. Another factor that I think contributes to this though is the race of the person spending time with a group of people that are another race. It also relies heavily upon the perception of the people of their own race. If a white person is hanging out with a lot of black people, other white people may consider that person a poser and say they are trying to “be black” when in fact they probably are not. This could possibly be because white people have more latent racism and subconsciously could even think this way. The black people would probably not see this white person as a poser, rather as a friend. If the roles were reversed, I think the black people are more likely to consider another black person a poser for hanging out with white people and accuse that person of wanting to be or act white, but I also feel that the white people that are allowing the black person to hang out with them are more likely to consider this person a poser. I think it all comes back to white people having harbored racism and while I do think some black people might see their white friend as a poser, it just seems more likely for a white person to feel that way because many white people still feel or believe in that supremacy. Overall, though, the people considering others posers, whether white or black or anything else, are the minority as most people would probably just see it as what it is-a friendship. Sat, 22 Oct 2011 03:55:55 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/20/voices-from-the-classroom-51/#IDComment210787838 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/13/voices-from-the-classroom-44/#IDComment207617190 Never before in my life have I ever experienced white guilt and I do not think I ever will. I also do not know any other white person who has ever mentioned feeling any sort of white guilt, though I do understand that it is not often something brought up in conversation. I am not trying to be rude or inconsiderate by saying this but it is completely true. While I feel slightly bad for what has happened to others in the past as a result of actions taken by white people, I do not and never will feel guilty for those actions. This is for one very simple reason that I am sure other white people share with me. I did not do anything wrong. I did not hurt anyone. I had absolutely nothing to do with the sins of the past nor did anyone I know. I think the problem here is that people are confusing sympathy with guilt and the two are very different emotions. Sympathy can be felt for anyone who has had something wrong done to them or anything bad just happen to them. It can be felt by someone who is a complete outsider in the situation and had no part in the incident that caused pain or struggle Guilt is something a person feels when they are responsible for the outcome of a situation. Even if it is something small, like me receiving something I desire over a black person who also wants it because I am white, I will not feel bad. For starters, a person would most likely never reveal that as the real reason and even if they did, I had nothing to do with it. The decision was made by another person and while I might feel bad for the person who was slighted and think the reasoning is wrong, I will still not feel guilt in any way at all. And honestly in today’s world, for every instance where a white person gains a competitive advantage over another race because he or she is white, there is one where a person of another race has an edge because he or she is a minority. Yes, white people do sometimes gain respect or attention for being white but it’s not like the scale is completely and totally tipped in our favor. And because I have nothing to do with this personally, I will never feel guilt because ultimately, these are choices made by other people. I am not a racist person and have never done anything to potentially harm a person of a different race. I treat everyone equally (not including friends or family but that is nepotism not racism) and therefore do not feel any white guilt in any situation. Sympathy, yes it is very possible and happens often but not guilt. Fri, 14 Oct 2011 23:32:05 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/13/voices-from-the-classroom-44/#IDComment207617190 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/02/voices-from-the-classroom-27/#IDComment204633993 To be honest, I do believe I would be slightly uncomfortable and worried if I had a child who was gay. It is not that I do not accept and support gay people and their fight for equality because I do, but I would still have reservations and concerns if my child was gay. Growing up and living in this world, I have seen and still see almost everyday how people who are gay are treated by certain parts of, and sometimes the majority of, society. They face so much adversity and their struggle is not something I would ever want my child to have to go through. Nobody wants to see their child constantly ridiculed or bullied for something that is out of their control and also not something that warrants that type of treatment. I would obviously still support my child and accept them and not love them any less, but I do think I would constantly be worried about what could happen to them. There has been so much anti-gay bullying brought to light lately and it is something that is incredibly difficult for children and teenagers to deal with, sometimes to a point where they decide not to deal with it anymore and if I had a child who reacted like that, I wouldn’t be able to handle it. It might be selfish for me to think this way but I do honestly feel having a straight child is somewhat safer. I do also think that the gender of the child could affect this. If I had a girl who was a lesbian, I think it might be easier because it seems lesbians have an easier time being accepted by their peers and by the rest of society. If I had a gay son, I do think the negativity and stress could ultimately prove to be too much and I would fear every single day what the future, whether immediate or distant, might hold for him. It is just a sad but true fact that gay men are not accepted by most of society and even sometimes when people say they accept gays they don’t really and still have some prejudices against them. However, if I did have a gay child, male or female, and they were able to deal with all of the negativity and rise above it, I would be very proud of them. I think that any parent who sees their child or children overcome odds and do or be something special feel a certain type of pride that not everyone who raises someone “normal” is able to experience. There are obviously many ways for a person to achieve this but because of the way gay people are still treated by many members of our society, they are grouped in that category. At least for now, until we as a society can become better. Sat, 8 Oct 2011 03:40:33 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/10/02/voices-from-the-classroom-27/#IDComment204633993 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/27/voices-from-the-classroom-23/#IDComment201599032 I don’t think that a person’s race has any impact on whether or not they use drugs. I think that is more dependent on who they are surrounded by in life and where they live. If a person grows up in an area where many people are using drugs all of the time then they might not see it as a bad thing. If a person is constantly around other people who are using drugs than they are much more likely to use drugs than someone who comes from a place where drugs are not a big part of anyone’s daily life. If something is a social norm where a person is living then they will not know any better or anything different and will most likely follow the crowd. The thing is, people seem to have an idea that certain races are the ones who use more drugs and are the ones living in communities where drug use is normal and possibly encouraged by the members of that community. We learned in class that this is not necessarily true, but it is still a common belief and that is possibly due to a few factors. Television and movies portray drug use in a certain way and that is usually by certain races and groups of people. Another possible factor is that, honestly, celebrities of certain races seem to make headlines more for drug use than high-prominence figures of other races which paints a bad picture of the entire race or group. Once again, the minority poorly reflects the majority. I know from experience dealing with people that the stereotypes of drug use are not true. Most people I know who use drugs of any kind are white but I was surprised by that fact when I first figured it out because everything I had seen led me to believe that it was people of other races who were more likely to use drugs (this came from TV and movies but also from where in Brooklyn I grew up. There were some minorities who were caught with drugs but as far as we, or I, knew none of the white people in our neighborhood used drugs (I was also eight at the time and somewhat naive). Overall though, the point comes back to the same idea that a person’s environment in life, particularly early on while they are growing up, will determine any of their behaviors in life with drug use included just like anything else that may be simpler or of lesser consequences. The people we are around and what we grow up seeing will always have more of an impact on lifestyles and behaviors than race which, while it can possibly play into this does not often. Sat, 1 Oct 2011 03:42:41 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/27/voices-from-the-classroom-23/#IDComment201599032 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/20/everyone-respond-to-this/#IDComment197802598 The entrepreneur videos on Haiti both impressed me and surprised me in a good way. When I think of Haiti I just think of a third-world country with basically nothing but people struggling to survive. I never would have imagined how many people were actually business people trying to make an honest living. Before the videos I thought Haiti was in such terrible condition that everyone there was just focusing all of their time on trying to survive and keep their families alive but I was pleasantly shocked to see people working hard and creating products or working on ideas in order to make life better for themselves and others. Now I only watched a few videos and am still aware that parts of the country look much worse but I still can’t go over the fact how normal some of it seemed and when I say that I mean compared to things here in the United States. Here we have millions of people fighting for those extra dollars and millions more who are trying to jumpstart their own businesses because they have an idea they believe in or something they feel passionately about. People do everything they can to make both a name for themselves and a living by following their dreams and manufacturing their own products, or even running other business ventures. I always thought of that initiative and drive as something that was primarily exclusive to the more modernized parts of the world and I’m not sure why. It just made more sense I think for the people who know what it is like to have to be the ones going out trying to have it all or have something at the very least. Then, I just always figured people in underdeveloped countries were always doing other types of work like farming or working the land. I never even stopped to think that they may also be trying to start a business or sell a product after making it with their own hands. The biggest part of that for me is that it helps put things in better perspective. Just seeing these videos quickly helped me understand that there is not as much of a difference between us and the people of Haiti as I thought. Both nations have people who are string and determined to work and live a better life. It is unfortunate that this is not the image everyone always sees or the perception people have because it is possible this is the majority rather than people living and dying in slums. I didn’t think I would care for the videos at all but I was wrong and I am now much more interested in finding out what I can do this semester to help the people of Haiti. Sat, 24 Sep 2011 03:25:00 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/20/everyone-respond-to-this/#IDComment197802598 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/15/voices-from-the-classroom-12/#IDComment194343195 When Sam asked this as a clicker question in class last week I was honestly shocked to learn how many people actually agreed with the conspiracy theories. I knew that there were people out there who believed that the US government was either partially or entirely behind 9/11 but I really thought it was a very small minority. If I recall correctly, about 25% of the class thought the government was involved and that tells me how little confidence, faith or trust Americans have in our government. That is something terrible and that needs to change in order for this country to ever improve from its current state and to grow in any way whatsoever but it is also alarming for other reasons. Thousands of innocent people lost their lives on September 11th in a tragic and horrific act that was the work of radicals who hate this nation and everything it stands for. I have a hard time believing that there was more to it. All of the people who claim President Bush knew about the planned attacks and blame him for letting them happen frankly confuse me. There are a lot of things that can be said about Bush whether you agree with his politics or not, but to accuse him of being involved in the merciless murder of so many innocent people is wrong and something I cant buy in to. To me, Bush is not the kind of person who can stomach something like that (and I mean that in a very good way) even to advance a political agenda. I know there is information coming out all the time trying to prove that 9/11 was partially an inside job but I really do think that comes from people who just like to cause controversy or have crazy beliefs. Unfortunately, America just lost that day. We were not as protected or as safe as we thought we were and we saw that the hard way. Even though there are possibly scientific inconsistencies with everything that happened that day, nobody is anywhere close to proving any of them are true. The one thing I will say though is that I would not be all that surprised to find out one or two individuals within the government had some sort of involvement in the planning stages of 9/11. Unfortunately I can see there being a politician corrupt enough to push this country toward war in order to advance his or her own political agenda and maybe help their career as well, but I do not think it would be someone that high-up and I definitely dont believe the President had anything to do with 9/11 and will not until something is proven. Sat, 17 Sep 2011 03:43:01 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/15/voices-from-the-classroom-12/#IDComment194343195 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/06/voices-from-the-classroom-2/#IDComment191771583 On the surface, this question seems like one of the easiest possible questions a person could ever answer but it is somewhat difficult. For starters, I classify myself as a male because I am one and I enjoy it (as dumb as that sounds). I understand that there are certain people who change their gender and I personally have no problem with that but a person is at least somewhat stuck with the gender they are born as. When a person is born as a male or a female, they will remain a male or a female until a certain age even if they want to change their gender. So, during a person’s childhood they can’t choose their gender (at least from a physical standpoint). At a certain point a person can change their gender so if looking at gender as a physical thing it can be chosen but not until a certain time. Now, as far as sexual orientations go, I do not think that is something that can be chosen. It’s tough for me to say this because I always say that there is always a choice to be made and we aren’t forced to do anything but I look at that applying more to day-by-day decisions. When it comes to decisions on a wider spectrum, I’m inclined to say a person’s sexual orientation is not something they choose and the reason I believe that is because I have gay friends who have told me it’s not a choice it’s just who they are and that’s enough for me. I believe them as well as all other gay people who swear that they didn’t choose to be gay (whether they are happy with the fact or not). The problem is that I’m not sure how I would classify a person’s sexual orientation. I don’t think it’s a choice but I also don’t think it’s genetic. It’s possible that a person’s experiences early in their life decide their sexual orientation but that also seems incorrect to me. I don’t think it makes complete sense but for some reason I believe that our sexual orientation just is what it is and that it is part of who we are. It is a part of us that just happens to be the way it is and nobody has a say in the matter. I used to think it was a choice and that if a person wanted to be straight they could but after talking to gay friends I know that isn’t true, however I am not so sure why exactly and I don’t think I ever will. We pretty much are who we are when we’re born and for the most part we stay that way. Again, it is possible for a person to change their gender but that is only because of scientific advancements. A person can LIVE however they want, be it a man or woman, straight or gay, but ultimately they are a certain way and can never escape that whether it’s an internal struggle or the way they are perceived by others. Sat, 10 Sep 2011 03:42:18 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/09/06/voices-from-the-classroom-2/#IDComment191771583 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/08/30/personal-preference/#IDComment189137429 While there are certainly comparisons that can be made between personal preference and prejudice, there is a fine line that separates the two and ultimately makes them very different. A personal preference is as simple as it sounds. People prefer some things to others in every area of life. People can like one food more than another but that does not mean they are prejudiced against the one they like a little less. When someone has prejudices they have pre-conceived judgments about or regarding a certain group of people and they are usually negative. When a person has a preference of one race over another it does not necessarily mean that they have something against the non-preferred race. It definitely could play into the equation, but to assume that would be foolish and naïve. Another factor is a person’s experiences and how they deal with stereotypes. If a person has spent a lot of time around people of a certain race and had good experiences, they may be more likely to be interested in someone of that race. If they have negative experiences, they may be less likely to be interested in a person of that race. This is not necessarily always the case but it certainly could be and in a situation where they have had a negative experience and therefore do not want to try the same thing again I don’t really think that is a prejudice. I feel that prejudices are more based off of stereotypes and judgments made without any experience. It could be perceived by some that dismissing someone else because of experiences with another person of the same race is wrong and prejudice and while it probably is wrong I’m hesitant to call it prejudice. If a person is not a fan of salmon and tries it at three different restaurants, they probably won’t try it the next time they go to a restaurant that serves it even if it is supposed to be great. Their personal experiences have left them in a position where their brain is likely to dismiss it because it failed multiple times so trying again likely wouldn’t result in success. Finally, it could just be that some people are genetically attracted to certain people whether they are the same race or a different one. We all have heard that everyone has a “type” and maybe that type is something we can’t choose. There are plenty of people who are only attracted to people of their own race, people who are only attracted to people of other races and people who are attracted to multiple races. It is simply what a person prefers and what they feel right with and is not nearly on the same level as prejudice. Fri, 2 Sep 2011 20:47:02 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/08/30/personal-preference/#IDComment189137429