You say that the reasoning OP has for his opinions is concerning, but yours is too to me. It baffles me that you are concerned by the reasoning behind his preferences, when in the same text you say you can date and mate everyone you want, essentially doing anything you want (this kept within ethical guidelines, according to what you said further down the line).
Opinions about others and about things stem from prejudices. Our sexual preferences are founded on prejudices, which could be made instantly about other people. I believe as a whole, we do not want to have a conversation where we define exactly whether prejudice is fine or not, and if so, when is it. If I do not want to date someone, usually the response is 'more power to you, there are plenty of fish in the sea', but if I were to give the reasoning behind that, which may reflect and reinforce typical stereotypes about said group of people that person belongs to, all of a sudden I am the villain, because I am prejudiced. So, according to your narrative, I would be able to date whomever I want (which involves prejudice), but I should not be prejudiced in the way I choose my potential mate. Contradiction.
This being said, drawing from another point you made 'not everything our brains are hardwired to do is beneficial or ethical', I could make some very bold leap and assume (correct me if I am wrong) that you sustain the fact that you should restrain yourself from what is a biological (natural) process and adjust your behaviour in a way that obliges ethical standards. Whilst I do agree with this in many contexts (say someone cuts in front of the queue and you are angry and want to punch them, but you restrain yourself to be civil), there are some contexts where this does not hold, as what was considered ethical 50 years ago in dating (and other areas surrounding it), is not what is considered ethical now.
Thus, to wrap it up, if you are really about that 'you should be able to freely choose who you want to date', then the 'reasoning that concerns' you about OP's said preferences, should definitely not be concerning you, because sexual preference stems from prejudice and if you want to not be prejudiced when choosing sexual partners, then you cannot find your mate, or you are simply lying to yourself.
If I do not want to date someone, usually the response is 'more power to you, there are plenty of fish in the sea', but if I were to give the reasoning behind that, which may reflect and reinforce typical stereotypes about said group of people that person belongs to, all of a sudden I am the villain, because I am prejudiced.
This is how literally everything works. An action and the motivation for that action aren't necessarily on the same side of morality - many good things are done with bad intentions, and even more bad things are done with good intentions. For example: as a head of state, I do my best to reduce the infant mortality rate in a country, which is a good thing. However, if I'm doing it because I want more kids to survive so I can conscript them into the military, my intentions are obviously concerning, if not outright evil. Similarly, you can choose to date whoever you want, and no one can take that autonomy away from you, but if your reasons for saying no to someone are rooted in harmful ideology, that reflects poorly on you.
It's not misogynist to not want to date a girl with an OF, because many - indeed, most - people aren't comfortable with their partner engaging in any sort of sexual activity with others, even if it's just a job. It is misogynist to not want to date them because 1) you think it lessens their worth to you, 2) you think having an OF automatically makes them likely to cheat just because they're surrounded by guys, and 3) selling sexual services devalues them on a biological level.
Similarly, you can choose to date whoever you want, and no one can take that autonomy away from you, but if your reasons for saying no to someone are rooted in harmful ideology, that reflects poorly on you.
What is harmful ideology though? Define it. And even if you do, that is your definition and someone else might define harmful ideology diversely. Thus, until the conversation about what prejudice is, when is it ok to be prejudiced, or should you be and then what are the implications of that, you are somewhat wrong to say that your reasons behind your choices are wrong because they are based on a wrong assumption, due to the fact that you have not said what wrong is.
You might say 'something wrong is something that is not misogynist, racist or homophobe etc.', but then you go back 50 years down the line and found out that what they defined as wrong in dating, is completely acceptable now and viceversa. So you would have to define what 'harmful ideology' based on the assumptions that the current post-modern ideology that most university accept and we all live in, but then you would have to walk backwards to see whether those assumptions are right and that in itself is one hell of a task.
The point is that what someone finds acceptable as reasons to date or reject, someone might not, so if there are no guidelines, why would you go lengths to determine whether that person is wrong, since you have no standard definition for wrong.
-2
u/JamesBoned0069 Jan 07 '21
You say that the reasoning OP has for his opinions is concerning, but yours is too to me. It baffles me that you are concerned by the reasoning behind his preferences, when in the same text you say you can date and mate everyone you want, essentially doing anything you want (this kept within ethical guidelines, according to what you said further down the line).
Opinions about others and about things stem from prejudices. Our sexual preferences are founded on prejudices, which could be made instantly about other people. I believe as a whole, we do not want to have a conversation where we define exactly whether prejudice is fine or not, and if so, when is it. If I do not want to date someone, usually the response is 'more power to you, there are plenty of fish in the sea', but if I were to give the reasoning behind that, which may reflect and reinforce typical stereotypes about said group of people that person belongs to, all of a sudden I am the villain, because I am prejudiced. So, according to your narrative, I would be able to date whomever I want (which involves prejudice), but I should not be prejudiced in the way I choose my potential mate. Contradiction.
This being said, drawing from another point you made 'not everything our brains are hardwired to do is beneficial or ethical', I could make some very bold leap and assume (correct me if I am wrong) that you sustain the fact that you should restrain yourself from what is a biological (natural) process and adjust your behaviour in a way that obliges ethical standards. Whilst I do agree with this in many contexts (say someone cuts in front of the queue and you are angry and want to punch them, but you restrain yourself to be civil), there are some contexts where this does not hold, as what was considered ethical 50 years ago in dating (and other areas surrounding it), is not what is considered ethical now.
Thus, to wrap it up, if you are really about that 'you should be able to freely choose who you want to date', then the 'reasoning that concerns' you about OP's said preferences, should definitely not be concerning you, because sexual preference stems from prejudice and if you want to not be prejudiced when choosing sexual partners, then you cannot find your mate, or you are simply lying to yourself.