First, I want to clarify the comments that I made in my 10 Jul 07 - 03:43 PM

In that post I said that "In my not at all humble opinion, you guys and gals are engaging in stereotypical thinking."
-snip-

My use of the word "stereotypically thinking" was purposeful. See these definition of "stereotype" :

n.
1. A conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image.
2. One that is regarded as embodying or conforming to a set image or type.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/stereotype

In using the word "stereotype" with its racial cultural connotations, I also meant to imply that repeated statements that boil down to "interracial mating results in beautiful children" could result in the creation of prejudgements about physical standards of beauty that could have considerable negative impacts on those who did not meet that standard of physical beauty, and those who do meet that standard.

To those who meant their statement about mixed race children being beautiful to refer specifically to those mixed race children or mixed race persons who they personally know, I apologize for my broad brush assertion that you were engaging in stereotypical thinking. However I stand by my point that it does appear to me that many posters to this thread were articulating a new "meme" that "interracial children=beautiful children".

I stated that "It's very sad if this is what it takes for the USA and the world to move away from the once firmly held belief that white descriptors of physical beauty are the only standards of beauty that can ever exist".

I stand by that statement. Note that I used plurals in talking about "white descriptors of physical beauty" and "standards of beauty".

While I did refer to "the USA and the world" having these "once firmly held standards", in that comment and in my other comments on this thread, I focused on "the USA and perhaps also in most other "Western cultures"}". Therefore, my comments did not include standards of beauty in Thailand or other Asian countries.

I would now like to address the comments I made in my 10 Jul 07 - 07:39 PM post.

In that post, I told John Hardly that "I have never said nor have I ever implied that you are a racist. I don't know you well enough from reading Mudcat threads or otherwise to call you a racist or imply that you are a racist."
-snip-

Those comments apply to all other posters on this thread. That said, I admit that I feel that I am more familiar with certain posters on this thread than with others-as a result of reading and exchanging comments with them over time on Mudcat's public forum and as a result of exchanging comments with them through Mudcat's private message system. I would emphatically say that I don't consider those persons to be racist. I started to post the names of these Mudcatters, but felt it might not be appropriate for me to do so as some might think that I was saying that I consider those posters whose names are on that list as being more accepting of other races/ethnciities than those whose names happened not to be on that list.

Of course, what I think about this subject matters no more than what anyone else thinks. However, my sincerest apologies to those who may have thought that I was categorising them or others on this thread as racist.

As to the view that I am a racist, while I emphatically deny that charge, I will not expend energy at this time and in this place trying to defend myself from that pernicious label.