Are the principal beneficiaries of the relaxing of attitudes towards race and sex actually White men

[Tooting Carmen]

Let me explain this hypothesis.

(1) When it comes to sex, the relaxation of attitudes towards sex before or outside of marriage, along with the introduction of the Pill and legalised abortion, have made it easier for men to sleep around and have consequence-free sex than was the case previously, when extra-marital sex carried a lot more social and (most crucially of all) biological jeopardy. (Hence the former concept of "shotgun weddings" etc).

(2) When it comes to race, the removal of legal and social taboos regarding interracial sex and marriage have not (entirely) come alongside a challenge to notions of Eurocentric beauty standards, colourism and racial hierarchy. This has arguably meant that Whites - especially but not exclusively White men - have been able to treat non-whites as sex objects much more overtly than used to be the case, when having a Filipina mail order bride or Caribbean gigolo would carry more social if not legal stigma.

N.B. I am largely playing Devil's advocate here, but I am interested in others' opinions on this even so.

[Andullero]

Let me explain this hypothesis.

(1) When it comes to sex, the relaxation of attitudes towards sex before or outside of marriage, along with the introduction of the Pill and legalised abortion, have made it easier for men to sleep around and have consequence-free sex than was the case previously, when extra-marital sex carried a lot more social and (most crucially of all) biological jeopardy. (Hence the former concept of "shotgun weddings" etc).

(2) When it comes to race, the removal of legal and social taboos regarding interracial sex and marriage have not (entirely) come alongside a challenge to notions of Eurocentric beauty standards, colourism and racial hierarchy. This has arguably meant that Whites - especially but not exclusively White men - have been able to treat non-whites as sex objects much more overtly than used to be the case, when having a Filipina mail order bride or Caribbean gigolo would carry more social if not legal stigma.

N.B. I am largely playing Devil's advocate here, but I am interested in others' opinions on this even so.

The premise of the title would hold water if white men were the ones doing most of the wandering overseas as it used to be the case during the age of discovery, but nowadays cheap travel (and moreover, emigration) have been eased like never before, so other races can partake on the partying, so to speak.

[Tooting Carmen]

The premise of the title would hold water if white men were the ones doing most of the wandering overseas as it used to be the case during the age of discovery, but nowadays cheap travel (and moreover, emigration) have been eased like never before, so other races can partake on the partying, so to speak.

I get what you are saying, but given the economic disparities (and not to mention disparities in visa restrictions) between the West and the Rest that still purvey even today, I maintain my Devil's advocate hypothesis. In any case, I am talking about the dynamics and relationships within Western societies themselves as much as those between Westerners and others.

[Incal]

Well it seems OP thinks civilization started with Anglicanism:

«You grant your favours, Caelia, to Parthians, to Germans, to Dacians; and despise not the homage of Cilicians and Cappadocians. To you journeys the Egyptian gallant from the city of Alexandria, and the swarthy Indian from the waters of the Eastern Ocean; nor do you shun the embraces of circumcised Jews; nor does the Alan, on his Sarmatic steed, pass by you. How comes it that, though a Roman girl, no attention on the part of a Roman citizen is agreeable to you?» (Martial)

[Tooting Carmen]

Well it seems OP thinks civilization started with Anglicanism:

«You grant your favours, Caelia, to Parthians, to Germans, to Dacians; and despise not the homage of Cilicians and Cappadocians. To you journeys the Egyptian gallant from the city of Alexandria, and the swarthy Indian from the waters of the Eastern Ocean; nor do you shun the embraces of circumcised Jews; nor does the Alan, on his Sarmatic steed, pass by you. How comes it that, though a Roman girl, no attention on the part of a Roman citizen is agreeable to you?» (Martial)

Anyway, the argument that the sexual revolution actually has been harmful to women (which doesn't necessarily mean it has been beneficial to men as such, but more so) is nowadays made by some feminists themselves:
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/0...al-revolution/
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/0...ral-pessimism/
https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/0...pose-marriage/

[Tooting Carmen]

As for interracial relationships, the history of Latin America in particular shows that they are not necessarily accompanied by genuine love and equality. Rather, the reasoning behind it en masse was a semi-eugenicist belief that, over time, 'unwanted' African and Amerindian traits would disappear.

[Token]

As for interracial relaitonships, the history of Latin America in particular shows that they are not necessarily accompanied by genuine love and equality. Rather, the reasoning behind it en masse was a semi-eugenicist belief that, over time, 'unwanted' African and Amerindian traits would disappear.

No, this eugenicist belief was ex post facto and only appeared in the 19th century with the birth of scientific racialism. Even then it was only popular among the intellectual elites, the masses didn't give a fuck about it.

The mixing in America was due to men needing to have sex with women (not sure if you understand this need).

[Jana]

No, this eugenicist belief was ex post facto and only appeared in the 19th century with the birth of scientific racialism. Even then it was only popular among the intellectual elites, the masses didn't give a fuck about it.

The mixing in America was due to men needing to have sex with women (not sure if you understand this need).

brilliant reply, rofl

[Tooting Carmen]

No, this eugenicist belief was ex post facto and only appeared in the 19th century with the birth of scientific racialism. Even then it was only popular among the intellectual elites, the masses didn't give a fuck about it.

There was still a belief even among the masses that 'whitening' was a form of social progress.

The mixing in America was due to men needing to have sex with women (not sure if you understand this need).

Still not based on genuine love and equality.

[Incal]

As for interracial relationships, the history of Latin America in particular shows that they are not necessarily accompanied by genuine love and equality. Rather, the reasoning behind it en masse was a semi-eugenicist belief that, over time, 'unwanted' African and Amerindian traits would disappear.