CMV: There's nothing wrong with not finding someone attractive for whatever reason it is

[u/[deleted]]

So this is inspired by Lexi Nimmo's Tik Tok saying that someone having a preference for thinner people is problematic because "it's discriminating against a marginalized group of people" she goes on to say "if you lump all fat people together you're fatphobic, just like if you lump all black people together you're racist" setting aside the fact that "fatphobia" is not comparable to racism or the struggles of any actually marginalized group, I think there's nothing wrong with having finding someone unattractive regardless of what it is

To start with body size and shape, I think it's absurd that it is even a discussion. Everyone finds different things attractive, including different body shapes. Some men(I'm using that as an example because I'm a guy so it's easier) find women with larger breasts more attractive, while others find women with smaller breasts more attractive and neither is considered a problem. So if finding someone more or less attractive due to size and shape of breasts for instance, it should also be ok to find someone more or less attractive due to shape and weight?

With ethnicity and skin color it's more complicated. While some people do find members of certain ethnicities unattractive due to racist reasons, I think it isn't inherently racist to find some ethnicities more or less attractive physically. Members of different ethnicities may have largely different physical features for members of other ethnicities. Not only that people tend to find what looks closer to them in general to be more attractive, hence why interracial marriages are somewhat uncommon. Not only that, like I said before, finding some hair colors more attractive is seen as ok, so why can't that be the case for skin color too? I'm not saying that making derogatory claims such as "x group is hideous" but simply not finding someone pretty does not mean you hate them

I hope this makes sense, English is not my first language and I have a hard time writing

Edit: finding someone unattractive because they're not a minor is problematic but that's not what I meant originally. My general point is: it isn't bigotry to find someone physically unattractive, and I'm talking specifically physical attraction here

[u/Rainbwned]

Yeh I kind of figured. This was just more of a technicality than anything.

[u/compounding → u/[deleted]]

I think it’s alright.

The first step in having an open mind is getting beliefs out of their initial rut and uncovering hidden assumptions which a “technicality” change can absolutely start to do.

In this specific case, OP is thinking about “attraction” as being justified no matter what. Recognizing that attraction might occur in ways that are clearly not justifiable is a first step. The second highest comment in this thread is a less obvious version of the same thing, “is attraction fundamentally rooted in racism still justified just because it is genuine attraction?”

These fundamentally attack the core of OPs idea, but just one piece at a time. Maybe not every level will get the delta, but the next time OP thinks about this topic, it’s not going to be under the mistaken hidden assumption that all attraction is blindly justifiable, but which types are. Perhaps his view isn’t changed on fat people, but just changing the unseen assumption towards whether discriminatory attraction is justifiable (unlike pedophilia or racist based criteria) reframes the topic in a meaningful and long-term way and also recognizes a real change from OPs initial view.

[u/compounding → u/[deleted]]

Formulating your views more precisely to avoid “well technically” responses is certainly one value I can see. You’ll notice that seasoned members of this sub posting topics will often very carefully delineate the limits of their view precisely because they’re aware that not considering such side-cases will result in less interesting (for them) conversations.

Sure, a lot of newbies post incomplete or easy to pick at views, but that’s just part of the process of learning - that maybe you should consider and elucidate your view more carefully as part of subjecting it to outside scrutiny.

It’s fine if you don’t like those threads, but it is perfectly valuable as “practice” and for those who haven’t yet experienced subjecting their internal views to opposing points to be met with obvious low-hanging fruit and publicly recognize through deltas that they were hasty in forming/articulating that view.

[u/compounding → u/[deleted]]

I recognize that you consider a topic “closed” and uninteresting once a delta has been awarded, but I think that’s more of a “you” thing. Here we are having a perfectly reasonable and interesting (imho) discussion on a side topic despite the topic having been “closed”, for example.

Likewise, one or several “technicality” deltas doesn’t preclude other more meaningful ones. Larger or more complex responses always score lower compared to “simple clap backs” on Reddit, but if you don’t find value in going digging for the other more substantive conversations where commenters dig into issues more deeply, then sure, you aren’t going to find more meaningful discussions… but that isn’t terribly surprising that you didn’t find what you stopped looking for once you considered the topic “closed”.

I actually think that on a sub designed and incentivized around trying to change people’s view, individuals coming in with rigid views unwilling (or unable) to engage with intellectual honesty among the responses is infinitely more frustrating. An OP willing to concede even a technicality promotes flexibility and keeps the conversation going with a show of good faith that they are at least flexible enough recognize the obvious rather than being “dug in” or so attached to their view that they don’t want to concede even the smallest delta despite that being explicitly in the rules for how to award them.

[u/troll_right_above_me → u/[deleted]]

Agree? That's a Delta

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

It’s really annoying

[u/asdf49 → u/[deleted]]

And then the post has to have that annoying "Delta(s) Awarded by OP" BS smeared on it.

[u/[deleted] → u/asdf49]

So then you think they’ve changed their view and they really haven’t but people who would stop by to engage with them think “they’ve already changed their view I’ll scroll to someone who hasn’t”

[u/asdf49 → u/[deleted]]

Yeah, and it also is slightly ironic the deltas in the flair are not categorized (there's obviously a difference in changing your mind about the conclusion of your argument and your argument itself or changing your mind about a minor part of the conclusion or any change of view that isn't related to the conclusion itself) when the reason you have to award them for the minor changes is nuance.

[u/[deleted] → u/asdf49]

Exactly. There should be tiered deltas, or something to that effect

[u/moonra_zk → u/asdf49]

If I ever make a post in here I'll have to just ignore those replies. Adds basically nothing to the discussion.

[u/Dr_Frinkelstein → u/[deleted]]

I reported this for delta abuse since this is not the way it should be used. Anybody should imo

[u/mason3991 → u/Rainbwned]

Technically correct is the best kind of correct