“Is the expression of racial or ethnic preferences in dating and hookups racism? And are the two equivalent?”
SCRUFF CEO and co-creator Eric Silverberg posed both questions in a September 13 op-ed for The Advocate, and for him, the answers are “Yes” and “Yes.”
Eight year’s after the debut of the app he launched, Silverberg announced that SCRUFF finally was committing to fighting sexual racism and other forms of discrimination and bigotry on dating apps. In addition to no longer requiring users to reveal their “Ethnicity” in order to unlock SCRUFF’s special features (like more guys on the “NEARBY” grid), paying subscribers who want to filter certain races out of their “NEARBY” options first have to reveal their own “Ethnicity.”
In other words, you can’t see what “Ethnicity” box others have ticked unless you tick one first.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
By relaxing one “Ethnicity” requirement, the app has actually strengthened another one. Although SCRUFF’s heart is in the right place, all isn’t suddenly swell for the underappreciated in gay society. Everyone won’t automatically open their minds and their eyes and finally stop limiting their hook-up options to “Whites/Blacks/Asians/Latinos/Whatever Only.”
Meanwhile, “Masc4Masc”, “No fems,” “No oldies,” and “No fatties” are also unlikely to be history.
Unfortunately, you can’t manage lust and desire, and making a few technical adjustments won’t stop gay men from exercising their so-called “preferences.” And frankly, I’m not so sure that SCRUFF is as committed to changing the gay world as Silverberg says it is.
One month later, the new SCRUFF looks and acts a lot like the old one. Whites rule. Everyone drools. Still. For proof, just check out the two Most Woof’d grids, which could be subtitled “Whites Only with Occasional Splashes of Color.”
If the app really wants to encourage gay men to move beyond narrow physical requirements when seeking sex and dating partners, why is it still supporting the very clichés it claims to be fighting by keeping two “Most Woof’d” grids in circulation (one featuring new members and another for SCRUFF superstars of the last hour)? As anyone who has used SCRUFF already knows, both feature mostly white-ish, mostly young-ish, mostly muscular guys, which supposedly represent what gay men really want.
A better move would be removing the Most Woof’d grids entirely or replacing one of them with something more inclusive and all-encompassing. If guys are getting enough attention to make Most Woof’d status, do they really need the extra exposure? And after trimming Most Woof’d from two grids to one, or doing away with it altogether, why not commit to a “GLOBAL” section that actually looks “global,” with men of a variety of shades, shapes, and sizes?
I’d like to see SCRUFF take its mission to promote inclusiveness beyond the search and try to get gay men to actually think about why they have such extensive checklists of racial and other requirements. It can host open conversations or feature roundtable discussions about the racism, age-ism, body-shaming, and fem-shaming that run rampant in our community.
The only way to make SCRUFF a different kind of gay app is by making it a different kind of gay app. That means making it about more than hooking up and scoring as expediently as possible by banishing all the types and ethnicities you don’t want from your line of vision.
SCRUFF bans primary profile photos that are too revealing. Perhaps it should also monitor the words that users include in their profiles. Filters don’t affect minorities the way “No Asians” and other statements of limitations do. One user can’t tell whether another is filtering him in or out, but discriminatory language is viewable to the entire public, and users pass it on to each other.
So why continue to allow it?
At the moment, SCRUFF is sending a message to members in the U.S. who include racial language in their profiles urging them to reconsider it: “Take a moment. Think about a time you were treated different because of who you are. Singling out or excluding entire groups based on race hurts. Please consider how your profile text impacts others on SCRUFF.”
Is that really going to persuade a white supremacist to edit out “No Asians” or “No blacks” or get so-called “rice queens” or “chocolate queens” to rethink the boundaries of their attraction?
Now is not the time for a gentle nudge in the right direction. The only way to fight sexual racism is by prohibiting the public expression of it. The words do much more damage to the spirit of gay men than filters and “Ethnicity” boxes.
Personally, I don’t care if guys filter me out of their searches. I’ve had far more brutal experiences with racism on dating apps than being filtered out by guys I don’t even know are filtering me out. But just because it doesn’t sting doesn’t mean I don’t recognize that it’s a symptom of a larger problem.
I commend SCRUFF for acknowledging that the problem exists. But talking about it in an op-ed isn’t the same as tackling it. It’ll require a lot more than a few superficial adjustments to get gay men to reassess how they approach race.
Making it harder for guys to search based on ethnicity won’t make race matter less. We need to get them to answer the difficult questions. But first, SCRUFF needs to start asking them.
Vince
In my experiences the biggest prejudices are in this order. 1. Age, 2. Body, 3. Racial prejudice. Mostly against Asians though. However you don’t hear them bitching about it all the time.
sfhairy
except for the two asians that write for queerty.
Heywood Jablowme
Age is readily apparent from the photos, at least within a range. Body type is readily apparent from the photos, at least if you provide a halfway accurate and forthright photo (and those who don’t do that will raise suspicion & not get much attention). Race is also apparent from the photos, at least somewhat.
As an older guy I see nothing wrong with so-called “age discrimination” on these apps. When I was young I felt intimidated by older guys, so I wouldn’t have sought that out. But nowadays – as explained by Queerty articles ad infinitum – the “daddy” thing is all the rage. Go figure.
On Scruff you don’t even need to say your age. But people can guess. And they will. You can also SAY you’re 5’10” and 190 pounds, you can say that all you want, but if your photo screams more like 250 pounds you’re not likely to fool anyone. Hey, some guys like that so go with it.
Kangol
Talk to more than a few Asian American gay men, and you’ll hear what you’re clearly missing.
Rupert
They bitch all the time. What’s funny is I have Asian friends that wouldn’t touch a black guy with a 10 foot poll
Vince
@Heywood Jablowme. Yes. I’ve learned about the daddy thing too from our great writer david toussaint and his aging and dating articles. However, I’ve also learned that’s it’s a fetish and like all bedroom fetishes they want to keep it there and not out in the open.
I agree about just using the photo’s alone can be very informative. From 25 to say 45 it’s a toss up. After that I can usually tell just by the body. That’s where the shit gets real and if you don’t take active steps to keep it up it will definitely show. That is as long as they’re using current pics and not something from say the time Clinton adminstration.
Wicked Dickie
@Rupert, my black friends wouldn’t touch Asian guys with their big black c@cks either. Carry on.
Heywood Jablowme
Mmhmm… well, even if Scruff were to ban ALL written reference to ethnicity/race, it would still be apparent (more or less) from the photos. So the only practical effect would be a slightly longer period of time looking at the photos. Nothing wrong with that, I guess.
sfhairy
haha, it’s a preference, not racism. get over it. you like what you like.
sfhairy
the Millenials grew up as a bunch of whining babies with helicopter parents who had to soothe over their feelings. so no, it won’t end.
PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
What a pathetic, insane, inane, bunch of bullthit!!
Are we now supposed to want to date and or fcuk anyone who wants us now??
Everyone is ENTITLED to their own preference. I have specific preferences in who I wish to meet on an app.
I do not discriminate against any race outside the app world. Everyone has their own sexual desires. And just because someone is not physically attracted to someone they are not a racist!!
crowebobby
I’ve always found café au lait Hispanics incredibly sexy– my first lover was a more black than white Cuban– but though I have the utmost respect for India Indians, I find them completely devoid of any sexual attraction even when I consider them handsome. I can’t “explain” it even to myself, it just is.
Vince
But Bobby. At your age I’d think anyone that still has a pulse would attractive:)
WayDifferent
I noticed in Chicago right after Obama was elected that suddenly we were all “equal” and were supposed to be sexually attracted to any and everything or were considered “racist”. C’mon, just try, you can get it up…it’s supposed to happen for anyone now.
Also, as an example, why do all black men “identify” as “mixed” on these apps when they are blatanly black when convenient in just about every other venue and forum. What are they trying to hide? And I’m not sorry that Indian men do absolutely nothing for me. Deal with it. For the record, I don’t specify my race on those apps because of principal and I feel it’s irrelevant (I do have a photo posted), and the option is racist in itself. Second, although I’m Caucasian if Western Europen descent, I’m not “White” either.
Shimata
Why do SOME black men identify as mixed when they clearly aren’t? Simple: internalized shame over failing to meet racially exclusionary white/European standards of beauty. Unfortunately, it’s been historically true in this country that the lighter a black person’s complexion, the more attractive they’re considered to be by a large number of people. In conjunction with this, there is the perception that being of mixed heritage makes you more beautiful, interesting, or desirable. It’s similar to the phenomenon in the South where every other white person you meet claims to be “_%” Cherokee Indian.
After a lifetime of being bombarded with marketing and media that make it clear their African features aren’t considered attractive, SOME black men will desperately try any tactic in order to get others to look beyond their supposedly undesirable physical features. Also playing into this is the phenomenon of Afro-Caribbean and Afro-Latino individuals who adamantly insist that they are not black. So, for example, if you see a black man on Scruff who happens to be of Caribbean and/or Hispanic origin, it wouldn’t necessarily be uncommon for him to claim to be “mixed” or “Latino” even though to you, he’s clearly “just black.”
WayDifferent
98% of black men identify as “mixed” on these apps, not “some”. If there’s “shame” they can go get their own app for their own people (like they do with everything else) then. I am not attracted to blavk men and their trick of listing themselves as “mixed” is NOT going to change that, for me anyway. If there is “shame” why don’t they chant “Say it loud, I’m black and I’m proud!” like they do everywhere else? They’re not going to select “mixed” on an online job application as they know damn well selecting “black” gives them a much better chance at landing the job do to “diversity” quotas. Again, “black when convenient” is beyond tiring.
Wicked Dickie
@WayDifferent, easy there fella, you’re definitely showing that gay racist side. Just remember that it is almost all white men and women that are calling you homophobic words at work (because clearly you don’t associate with black people). And it’s white men in power (cops, politicians, lawyers, clergy) who are working to deny gay rights. Lastly, there’s not a separation between white gay rights and “all others” gay rights. The powers-that-be don’t care that you’re white. If that were the case, gay rights would not even had been a topic of discussion. Carry on now.
Wicked Dickie
@WayDifferent, you’ve proven the point. You’re not attracted to black (race), and blondes (hair color). I’m sorry, “usually” blondes. Go get medicated, please. You’re a lost cause.
Shimata
@WayDifferent, precisely 98% you say? I’d love to read the undoubtedly fascinating sources you used to come up with that confident and precise figure. Though based on your statement that “they can go get their own app for their own people” (because there’s absolutely NOTHING racist about that telling comment), I’m not sure I’d be allowed to read the research unless I could verify it was made by “my people” and not “your people.” Who exactly are your people, by the way? You claim to be a non-caucasian Western European, yet you’re clearly using apps designed by people who, by your own admission, aren’t “your people.” With such illuminating comments as you’ve made on this subject, I can’t help but wonder if all of “your people” are so equally charming and loveable.
But on a serious note, you need a hug or something. Your naked hatred is scary, ridiculous, and repugnant. You’re clearly unhinged and unhappy.
surreal33
The foundation of America is RACISM. Until we unpack and acknowledge this fact all the noise on Grindr, Scruff, etc. is useless subterfuge.
Polaro
It would help to understand the difference between racism and attraction.
JK 1984
Everytime an article about racial or other “preferences” comes up there is always the exact same comments. So I’ll break it down nice and simple:
– it is not that you are expected you f%€k every person who messages you without regard to what you want.
– it is not that you can’t have a preference for who you want to hook up with/screw/date/marry.
A preference is “I like “. It is saying what you prefer in a person. Saying “No ” is not a preference, it is an exclusion.
Everyone has preferences, there is no denying that and you are absolutely entitled to them and bodily autonomy over your own body.
What exclusions do is two fold.
1. Yes it can hurt the feelings of the person who sees that message, when they are told over and over again that they are not even going to be considered because of an attribute they cannot control anymore than what hand they write with or their height. That can really hit someone and out isn’t necessary to be a d!€k like that.
2. Excluding an entire nationality, skin colour or whatever group limits your options and you don’t know what you are potentially missing out on. You never know, the best lay of your life or maybe something more may come from someone who doesn’t meet your specifications you had built up in your head.
The last thing I’ll say is have a think about why you have the “Preferences” you do. Why do you not like ? A lot of it may be unconscious racism, or internal homophobia when it is “No fems”, etc….
Just think about it, you may not change your mind but at least think about that before excluding giant groups of people.
Polaro
Said you. I”m old, I’m the most excluded there is. So, are you going to date me? No, so stop pretending. That wastes both our time. Same with race, body type, or love of Doctor Who. Grow up. Not everyone will love you. And in some cases, they won’t even like you.
WayDifferent
Agreed JK, by the logic of all this BS, at the young age of 52 I am “entitled” to every young dude under 25 that I want or I am being discriminated against.
JK 1984
Polaro, you’re right I wouldn’t date you, entirely because I’m married. If I was single and looking for a hookup I would look at whatever profiles meet my preferences/likes and go from there. Since you know exactly nothing about me how do you know I’m not into silver foxes or “old” people?
WayDifferent, you have no entitlement to another person’s body. Not getting what you want isn’t being discriminated against.
I’ll repeat myself since neither of you seem to have reading comprehension: “Everyone has preferences, there is no denying that and you are absolutely entitled to them and bodily autonomy over your own body.”
You might prefer blondes or 18-21 year olds or Black men or 10 inches +. That is a preference and everyone has them.
Saying “No Asians” is excluding.
Personally I don’t care if you do exclude people, it is your life and you will likely be the poorer for it. However maybe, just maybe you will think about why you are excluding a group of people (or multiple groups of people) and realise that it doesn’t come from a preference but instead racism, ageism, internal homophobia or any number of other reasons.
And be honest about it, you don’t have a preference, you have an exclusion.
Polaro
Said the married man who does not participate. This is not an intellectual/philosophical debate. That’s where you go wrong when you apply your PC intellectualizing to other people. Spend some time on these apps and then tell me about it, unless you another guy in an open relationship pretending your just looking for “friends”. No, you don’t get to allow me to block blond twinks if I want to, because, god knows, someone needs to. And, btw, stick that unconscious racism nonsense back in the PC Sociology 101 book you dug it out of.
JK 1984
Polaro, you do realise before someone is married they were, shock horror not married.
I have been through the whole scene of online dating so it isn’t some philosophical debate, I am speaking from personal experience. Both as the person only the receiving end and the one dishing out.
Never took PC Sociology 101 or whatever you want to call it, again speaking from personal experience.
You don’t get to tell me what I can/can’t participate in you old (going by your own descriptor of yourself) angry little man. Everyone is allowed their own voice, you don’t have to agree with me and I don’t give two f#€ks if you do.
Umoja
This is really quite a horrid and hostile article:
“won’t stop gay men from exercising their so-called “preferences.””
We’ve been there and we’ve fought that war, the language of ‘preferences’ is used by the Right to undermine gay rights, and the erase of preferences is how the illiberal Left fans those same flames.
When you seek to structure social norms, apps, algorithms etc. to limit the validity of individual desire and to thwart the concept of individual consent around sex you are doing ‘rape culture’. Stop trying to coerce men into unwanted sex.
Umoja
erasure^
Shimata
I swear, people like you just…ugh.
This isn’t an attempt to “thwart the concept of individual consent around sex.” I mean, are you serious right now? Are you actually freaking serious? How you can equate the elimination of a search criteria to “rape culture” is beyond ignorant and hyperbolic, not that I should be surprised since you appear to be a typical triggered conservative who sees any and every attempt to promote human decency as “Liberal propaganda,” because God forbid we actually treat each other better.
Here’s a suggestion: go talk to a few rape victims and ask them if their trauma would have been lessened had they been able to choose the race of the monsters who violated them in the most intimate way imaginable.
Open your eyes and actually exercise your atrophied reading comprehension. This effort by Scruff (though half-hearted and ill-executed) is to encourage people to be more conscientious of the potentially vile and painful language they use when stating their preferences. You and everyone else on this planet are entitled to your sexual preferences. Seriously, by all means, be attracted to whomever you want (provided it’s legal and consensual, that is). Just don’t be a douchebag about it when you’re filling out your profile.
I reiterate: you are entitled to your preferences, just don’t be a douchebag about it.
I re-reiterate: you are entitled to your preferences, JUST-DON’T-BE-A-DOUCHEBAG-ABOUT-IT.
Why is this so hard for you and others like you to understand? Guilt-rage born from cognitive dissonance, perhaps? Either that, or y’all really do just have God-awful reading comprehension.
Umoja
Thanks for the fleshed out reply:
I’m just a guy who fought his way back from the brink to have my own identity and desires – rather than one enforced by a church… or an algorithm… or a Queerty contributor
This article is hostile to the the user-driven ‘most-woofed’ page on Scruff. Being woofed is a positive, affirmative thing. It is non-coerced (you never need to woof). If Helligar wanted to write only about exclusionary language use on Scruff, he could have (and I would have agreed) – but instead he cast his net far wider.
Instead of mere language use he instead wants to target all kinds of people, even people whose desires direct them to the more marginal in society, to “to rethink the boundaries of their attraction” – but this is only a few notes different to things like reparative therapy – which wants gay men to also “to rethink the boundaries of their attraction”.
Instead of really investigating the complexities and politics of language use, Helligar mandates the fascistic suppression of expression of forbidden queer desires when he calls for “prohibiting the public expression of it.”
When I say rape culture – I do not mean that people will/ought be traumatised by the content of this article. Rape culture coheres within realms where the free exercise of sexual consent is contested – and this is what Helligar wants, to contest Scruff user’s exercise of sexual consent, and further, the subjugation of Scruff users to thought and expression policing.
Shimata
So, as you understand it:
1) Suggesting people use more respectful language in their dating profiles is equivalent to “enforcing” a change to their (your) identity and desires.
2) Advocating for the removal of a feature which (perhaps unintentionally) glorifies Group A over Group B is little more than thinly veiled hostility for the former.
3) Encouraging people who are part of a shared community to critically examine their learned biases is tantamount to conversion therapy.
4) Censoring demonstrably hurtful and alienating language is fascism.
5) Helliger’s true motive in writing this piece is to rob all Scruff users of their sexual freedoms and opinions.
While I am truly astounded at all the mental contortions you must have performed in order to produce those opinions, it’s your inelegant and, frankly, absurd misappropriation of the term “rape culture” as a premise for Helliger’s supposedly nefarious ulterior motives that truly takes the cake. It should be quoted as a textbook example of the strawman logical fallacy. Again, I suspect some cognitive dissonance is at play.
Wicked Dickie
About 10 years or so ago, I was at a gay club in San Diego, said hi to a white guy (just being cordial). He looked me up and down and dismissed me. No big deal. Fast forward a few hours later when the club let out and I was walking home. I came up on a crime scene (ambulance, police car). Stopped to see what was going on. I saw the victim who was bleeding from his head and recognized him as the guy from the bar. The police had the guy that assaulted the the victim. He was also white. The perpetrator was calling the victim all sorts of “F” words, and other homophobic slurs. You know I did? Shrugged my shoulder and continued my walk home. Moral of the story, don’t be an asshole to other people, it will come back to bite you.
WayDifferent
Oh please. Totally irrelevant. I’m White and White flaming gays give me that up/down look of contempt all the time. Even straight black guys are notorious for that. And you should let your bros knpw that they need to mind their eyes when they’re gabbing in the phone, those eyes always wander to my crotch.
Umoja
No.
Choosing not to respond to a “hi” in a densely populated social space is a rude behaviour, but an unadorned “hi”, a nod, a smile, a wave in this context can plausibly be read as “hi, please assess me as a viable sexual partner”
Contempt for a victim of violence crime is callous and lacking in human compassion and says far more about you than he
Polaro
I’ll have to agree, rude is rude. We have our preference, we can chose not to be rude or unkind.
zxcv
@waydifferent that’s because your people are known to be crude and crass. No wonder they’re generally hated.
@umoja you forgot to add “White Lives Matter.” You people always expect compassion when your kind is incapable of giving it to others
Wicked Dickie
You do know that not everyone is attracted to white guys, right? Even other white guys.
WayDifferent
Bingo.
Umoja
He does know, because he also goes on the attack of men who have a preference for Asian men, and also for black men. There is apparently no moral way to desire a sexual partner without desiring ALL sexual partners.
GetOffMyInternets
@Umoja
His stance on sexual attraction between men and his blasting of people, rings very very similar to the sex Nazi feminists like Andrea Dworkin who once said “If your sexuality involves pornography, you have no right to your sexuality.” It’s obnoxious and the biggest bag of bullsh*t ever.
GetOffMyInternets
I honestly wonder if it has ever occurred to Jeremy, that maybe it doesn’t matter to lots of people who find black men attractive, that those same people just don’t find him good looking? So because he’s not considered attractive to someone he gets to scream racism, even though said people who reject him might beat off to Taye Diggs or Tyson Beckford? There’s someone out there for everyone and just because someone doesn’t find Jeremy attractive, doesnt make them racist. His victim mentality is so pathetic. He needs a therapist, not a column.
WayDifferent
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!
Polaro
Oh, you don’t like black guys? You’re a racist. Oh, you like black guys? You’re objectifying them. I’m so tired of the PC nonsense. Getting as bad as the right-wing penchant for lying all the time.
GetOffMyInternets
Seriously @WayDifferent these columns he writes are the exact same personal complaint he repeats over and over again: “White men don’t like me. I’m not sexually attracted to my own race, but if you aren’t then you’re racist. You have no right to your sexual preference because I can’t get a date off a sex app.” Maybe it’s becsuse people read his columns and recognize him and can tell how awful and insecure a date would be with him would be. Not because he’s black, but because it’s a columnist who is so insecure and full of self hatred, and full of his own dislike for his own race that the whole date would be made about him. And if you didn’t call him back the next day after the date? Suddenly you’re Jim Crow. No I don’t find Jeremy attractive in the slightest. Not because he’s black, but I don’t find him good looking at all. But apparently according to him, I’m not allowed to feel that way becsuse he’s got some victim mentality because of years of rejection.
Wake up Jeremy, it’s not your skin color or always about you. And if it is about you personally and not because of your race, it is because you’re the most insufferable human ever!
Umoja
It should be pretty easy to comprehend that for males, many many traits fall on a normal distribution: including breadth of sexual interest.
The average man will have the average breadth to his sexual tastes, whereas move two standard deviations up and down and you will find extreme openness and extreme rigidity in sexual tastes. This is something that is true of height, penis size as well as a host of psychological traits.
Polaro
I want a box to check to advertise that I don’t care how big your dick is; I care only how big a dick you are. I’m being oppressed since these sites do not cater to my fondness for average packages. Write an article about the trauma I suffer. Get some spun up people to shout about it. My feelings are hurt.
1898
scruff is still 1000x better than grindr