If a chihuahua and great dane, through much effort, can create an offspring, why are human beings so offended by differing externals which are a product of circumstance not choice?
I don’t really understand the question.
@zeppo@lemmy.world
think about it long, think about it hard, think about it long and hard and smile…;)
Why did you repeat the title in the body of your post?
Because dogs are better than humans.
Are you asking why some people are racist? I’m not sure but it almost sounds like that.
Because historically the most dangerous things to humans have been not other animals, but other humans. Were generally afraid of anything dissimilar to ourselves because that often meant war or competition between tribes and such.
It doesn’t make sense in the modern world but unfortunately instincts are hard to let go of for some people.
Your question would be much better applied to height discrimination, which is something that’s almost never mentioned, but is a lot more indicative of the nature of discrimination itself.
It is instinctual, as others have said, but it has nothing to do with tribalism or war, its about resources. Discrimination is almost always about resources (the notable exception being gender/orientation based discrimination, which I guess is religious?).
The discrimination against small people (and obesity and age as well), is more basic, and likely older (in evolutionary terms), and is oriented towards hunting and fighting. We think less of smaller, fatter, and older people because they’re assumed to be less capable of gathering (and fighting for or defending) basic resources.
Discrimination against races is more recent, and more societal, and is more about monetary resources, and isn’t even entirely a matter of race. Poor white people can be discriminated against in the exact same way for the exact same reasons. Racism is more classist than discrimination against height, weight age, etc. but is essentially still a matter of these classes being seen as less capable of getting resources.
You can see it more easily if you look objectively at the discriminatory tendencies of women (and I mean that in a very generalized way). They tend to be far more discriminatory towards resource based biases… Height, weight, physical condition… They’re often inexplicably attracted to overly aggressive partners, occasionally to their own detriment. The more instinctual a woman is, the more likely to pursue the overly aggressive men. Race isn’t anywhere near as much a factor, and there are notable exceptions in all factors for women if a man obviously has a lot of resources already (no indictment intended ladies, just is what it is, and generally)
And of course it’s more obvious among women for the same reason… The disparity (again, in a very general sense) between male and female in ability to gather and defend resources affects women’s choices of partners more so than men.
@aelwero@lemmy.world so being black isn’t a disqualifyer if you two are relatively the same height? a chihuahua, bred in the central and south american hotter climates, with a great dane, bred for mor cold, hostile climates, requiring 300x(exaggeration) the resources….wtf, person?
