Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on September 10, 2003, 04:28:02 PM
-
Heres the scenario:
You're in a discussion about firearms and you're white. The person who you're discussing it with is not a white person.(They brought the subject)
You bring up the fact that African-American males between the ages of 15-24 have the highest firearm homicide rate of any demographic group: 103.4 deaths per 100,000 vs. the white male, 15-24, who has a death rate of 10.5 deaths per 100,000 (1997 stats) (Source: PLU University--http://www.plu.edu/~gunvlnce/facts3.html )
So, the person you're discussing this gets all huffy because they think you're being racist. I tell them its a cultural difference. She still thinks I'm racist. :rolleyes: (Yeah, thats why I dated a black woman when I was 22, because I'm racist! :rolleyes: )
Question:
Is bringing up facts and data racist today?
Why do liberals get so bent out of shape when faced with facts and data?
-
I dont think so but who were you talking to AL SHARPTON? :D
-
Originally posted by boxboy28
I dont think so but who were you talking to AL SHARPTON? :D
No, shes Philippine, American-born...but that shouldn't matter.
-
Oh a woman...well pfft, why'd ya waste your time? :p
JK JK!
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Oh a woman...well pfft, why'd ya waste your time? :p
JK JK!
That crossed my mind for a second, then I thought of my wife...you DON'T want to debate her, she'll kill ya with facts off the top of her head, and when you question those facts and look them up, she's dead on. Kinda scarey, guess thats why I married her, she's smarter than me. :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Why do liberals get so bent out of shape when faced with facts and data?
Dunno about racist Rip but yer definitely a "partiest". Lumping in all liberals when yer debating a woman, ya oughta be ashamed. Maybe yer just a partier? ;)
-
your only thing wrong was trying to have a reasonable conversation with this person.
(IMO bringing up FACTS can't be racist, opinions can be racist, facts are facts)
however trying to inject reason into a conversation with an unreasonable person offends them greatly
now you know better, don't do it again.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
That crossed my mind for a second, then I thought of my wife...you DON'T want to debate her, she'll kill ya with facts off the top of her head, and when you question those facts and look them up, she's dead on. Kinda scarey, guess thats why I married her, she's smarter than me. :)
She married you, that debunks your statement right there.
;)
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
however trying to inject reason into a conversation with an unreasonable person offends them greatly
now you know better, don't do it again.
LOL, my best friend and co-worker JUST gave me that same lecture. Hey, I'm a victim ;) I was lured into the conversation because she knows I'm a gun owner. :)
-
Originally posted by Martlet
She married you, that debunks your statement right there.
;)
Sometimes size DOES conquer common sense. ;)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Heres the scenario:
You're in a discussion about firearms and you're white. The person who you're discussing it with is not a white person.(They brought the subject)
You bring up the fact that African-American males between the ages of 15-24 have the highest firearm homicide rate of any demographic group: 103.4 deaths per 100,000 vs. the white male, 15-24, who has a death rate of 10.5 deaths per 100,000 (1997 stats) (Source: PLU University--http://www.plu.edu/~gunvlnce/facts3.html )
So, the person you're discussing this gets all huffy because they think you're being racist. I tell them its a cultural difference. She still thinks I'm racist. :rolleyes: (Yeah, thats why I dated a black woman when I was 22, because I'm racist! :rolleyes: )
Question:
Is bringing up facts and data racist today?
Why do liberals get so bent out of shape when faced with facts and data?
Perhaps they way you stated your view came out wrong...or maybe you have racist tendencies and never realised it...or maybe you were winning an arguement with a woman (never has good come of this).
It's not just Liberals that get bent when faced with facts and figures, Conservatives can act exactly the same. (See Pat Buchannon)
And we ALL know why you dated a black woman, you wanted some Brown Sugar. ;)
-
Your right, I shouldn't have lumped "All liberals"...but its just a strange coincidence that every time I debate with one (there are LOTS here in Latte Land) that the conversation ends when I start up with facts and data.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
And we ALL know why you dated a black woman, you wanted some Brown Sugar. ;)
If I remember to, I'll scan her picture tonight. She was beautiful! after a couple dates she ended up dropping me and dating one of the Seahawks defensive linemen, Jacob Green :( Lost out to a big guy!
-
Is bringing up facts and data racist today?
Depends on if you're white or not.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
And we ALL know why you dated a black woman, you wanted some Brown Sugar. ;)
As my Dad usta say, "change your luck" :D
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Question:
Is bringing up facts and data racist today?
So having started a debate about guns duscussion drifted into debating racism ?
Whether you are racist or not should have no bearing on the debate.
Its a bit like shrub declaring any one who disagrees with him as "unamerican"......it side steps the debate.
Nothing was proved............
I suppose it would be very liberal to point out that the demographic analysis used whilst splitting all sorts of stuff such as race , gender, age, plus doing some discussions elsewhere on morality and the effects of the media at no point correlates income or standard of living , or even peer groups and other local social influences.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Sometimes size DOES conquer common sense. ;)
That mean you have a big head on your shoulders?
:D
-
Why don't you ask Jesus?
-
Rip, what were the circumstances leading up to the discussion about firearms? Was this at work, or in a social setting?
Probably the only place you can intellectually defend your position would be in a class, where open debate and discussion is kept somewhat under control by the group leader, instructor, moderator, etc...
Otherwise, just say something like, " I hear what you're saying, and firearms aren't for everybody." Always keep it clean and courteous, especially when dealing with women...and be pleasant or you'll be sorry.
Doesn't mean you agree. It's just a non offensive way of acknowledging her/his opinion without getting in their face. Facts should only be used in academic discussions, where they are "ammunition" for your argument.
For social situations, if it gets down to it, I guess you could always lighten things up by saying, "Well, I'm a redneck...was born in the South, killed my first deer at the age of 6. It's the way I was brought up." Then you've got to look in your bag of tricks, do something funny like stand on your head, pull the sheet out from under the tableware, tump over your beer, etc...anything to change the subject .:D
Good luck!!! It's all important to get her to laugh. How did you handle it Rip?
Les:)
-
Tilt, as usual, you post eloquently and your advise is always absorbed! Thank you.
Leslie, its a co-worker and she and I get along very good. Except when I start presenting facts with current events that come up in small talk.
The discussion came up when she approached me about how good "Bowling for Columbine" was...she said they compared a city in Canada to that of Detroit, or something along that nature...how violence was a non-issue "just across the border!" I said "When you compare Detroit to any city for violence, the facts will be skewed because of the fact that Detroit has a higher than avg. population of blacks, and young blacks, because of the cultural surroundings, have a higher chance of being involved in firearms or crime in an urban environment". (Shes a city girl, born and raised in a tight-knit philippine community) Thats how it started.
She immediately turned back around to end the conversation by saying "oooooh, don't...don't! Don't start with that!" I explained that I was just going by facts and data and told her she knows me better than that. The discussion ended. I felt compelled to show the data, but I'm sure she would have even been worse. So, we went back to work, and life goes on. (Shrugs).
We've had spirited conversations on current events before in the past, and usually make small concessions to ones feelings on such subjects, but this one caught me off guard and I began questioning myself if indeed this was a racist mentality. I don't feel like it is, but she made me feel like bringing up those facts that I was indeed racist.
-
Your co-worker is stupid.
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Your co-worker is stupid.
heh, well, not to sound like I'm defending her, but she has a 4 year degree in Engineering, thats 2 more years than me. But yeah, thats how me and about 8 others feel about her (in a 10 person group!)
-
4 year degree in Engineering
stupid has NOTHING to do with education.
(see sig below)
-
Ripsnort, if you weren't racist, you would still be with the black chic.
:)
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Ripsnort, if you weren't racist, you would still be with the black chic.
:)
:)
-
Being called a racist is very hurtful. Imo, you can only determine whether someone is a racist by observing their actions, i.e. intentionally demeaning someone because of their race and that alone. Racism is serious business.
It would be to me like someone calling me lazy, or I didn't "work" because I'm an artist, work at home and choose my own hours. I freelance.
Back to the subject. I had a boss one time, Bill Knapp, who was a tail gunner in a B-24 during World War II. He was about 60 years old when I worked in the appliance dept. at a wholesale electronics and appliance store (my first Summer job.) He was a character, let me tell you. He showed me a picture of him and his bomber crew, and I wish I had that picture today...man. He was a reformed alcoholic, and didn't take a drink at all. I remember one time he brought in a little weed to load in with his pipe tobacco, and smoked it sitting at his desk in the office. So this was a cool guy for an old man.
He told a lot of stories about his experiences...didn't talk about the war at all, but my Dad told me he was shot down twice during the Ploesti oil field raids.
Anyway, one time he was very upset in the office. Evidently someone had called him a racist...don't know who, (had happened earlier at some time, and don't know when.) But he was po'd and resented it extremely.
He was not a racist. And I don't think you are either Rip. I don't blame you for being upset and thinking about it. People don't think about what they say, and are thoughtless jerks.
If it was me, I think I would have said something to the boss about it, if I thought t would interfere with my job performance, and if I felt the co-worker was trying to be malicious. Probably not the case, but sounds like things may never be the same, possible loss of a friend.
Sorry this happened to you. Lesson learned the hard way. I'd tend to avoid this person, because she seems confrontational.
Les
-
Thks for the post Leslie. I guess I did come for some "support" (less the sappy group hugs). I did document the entire conversation in a word file, but after I thought "My God, we've come to the point of feeling as though one needs to document a conversation for protection from *possilbe* (and I mean very slight possible) consequences in the future because the conversation was on the job. :(
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
heh, well, not to sound like I'm defending her, but she has a 4 year degree in Engineering, thats 2 more years than me. But yeah, thats how me and about 8 others feel about her (in a 10 person group!)
You have nothing to worry about Rip. She'll be promoted to a higher position, and probably move on to another office. At least, by the sound of things, that would be the best thing that could happen.
Les
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
"My God, we've come to the point of feeling as though one needs to document a conversation for protection from *possilbe* (and I mean very slight possible) consequences in the future because the conversation was on the job. :(
I work at Lockheed Martin, I know from whence you speak Rip. Though I havn't had the same type of experience, I find myself really being carefull about what I say and to whom. If I didn't enjoy my job so much and the people I work with I can see how it could really put a kink in interpersonal relationships at work.
When I first met you at the first AH con my impression of you did not include a racist, I did think you were a little weird though... :D :D
-
"When you compare Detroit to any city for violence, the facts will be skewed because of the fact that Detroit has a higher than avg. population of blacks, and young blacks, because of the cultural surroundings, have a higher chance of being involved in firearms or crime in an urban environment".
I believe you aren't a racist Rip, hiowever this statement seems very racist. You cannot necessarily attribute the high crime rate to race. It may be due to economics, unemployment rate, single parent families etc. Your figures are correct, your conclusions are suspect.
-
It sounds like deductive reasoning to me MT. Please tell me if it's not, and what kind of reasoning it is.
Les
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
I believe you aren't a racist Rip, hiowever this statement seems very racist. You cannot necessarily attribute the high crime rate to race. It may be due to economics, unemployment rate, single parent families etc. Your figures are correct, your conclusions are suspect.
"because of cultural surroundings...
I covered that, but evidently, not thoroughly enough. The conversation was ended abruptly.
(and thks for your response, I did want to hear what you had to say about this subject)
-
It depends on how you portray the data. It can be used in a racist manner and it can also be used in a non-racist manner.
If you portray it as the excessively simplistic "Blacks are more violent" then it could be reasonably seen as racist, even if you did not intend it that way.
If you portray it as a blunt fact or as a fact with complex causes then I would not see it as racist. That doesn't mean the person you are talking with won't see it as racist, but many people are, er, unduly sensitive.
Personally I think that poverty and massive criminalization are the root causes of this statistic.
(Hey Ripsnort, are you going to make it to the West Coast Mini Con?)
-
One time my hunting buddy and I went to What-a Burger at 4 in the morning to eat breakfast. It was cold weather, about 14 degrees outside.
Two girls, about 18, were sitting at a booth not far from ours. They commented, "You guys are hunters?" Kinda derisive.
My friend replied, "I bet you girls have been out dancing." They just looked at us with a blank stare. My friend then said, "Been drinking too, I suppose." And they nodded their heads.
LOL...they didn't say anything after that.:D
Les
-
If it's not racist to claim there is a disproportionate number of black males in our prison system then it's not racist to "statisticalize" black males in gun related crimes. Wondering if you see where I'm going with this MT.
-
Newspeak: NonPC=Racist
Moral-talk about the donuts and the Seahawks at work and save the debate for OT.
-
Originally posted by Gadfly
Newspeak: NonPC=Racist.
Only an idiot would belive this is true. That goes for both the PCophile and the PCophobe.
I love how Conservatives always fall back on the tired old "Liberals just want PC crap" argument. Its so much easier than actually thinking about what said Liberal is saying.
I happen to agree with you that PC is BS. However, not every race subject is PC BS.
This isn't a PC matter of calling people negroes, blacks or african-americans. It is about perceptions and causes. If somebody claims that black men have a higher death rate due to violence and a higher incarceration rate because blacks are just more violent and lawless that is racist.
The facts are that in the USA blacks do have a higher death rate due to violence and a higher incarceration rate. That is a fact. But the reasons for it are much more complicated and difficult than a simpleminded "Blacks are just that way".
-
Karnak, Rips dilemmia is an example of what I stated. Who said Liberal? I said PC.
-
Yeah, thats why I dated a black woman when I was 22, because I'm racist!
Im not calling you an racist Rip...
BUT
The thing i find funny is that people always have to "prove" that they are not racists... Like the quoted post above...
Rip could just have said, "im not an racist" but he said "Yeah, thats why I dated a black woman when I was 22, because I'm racist!"
Ive seen this alot... I´m not an racist i have a black neihbour...
-
Also "I'm not a racist, but..." tends to mean "I am a racist and...".
-
I figure I've won when the only retort to facts are that I am a "racist".
MT... how is it racist pointing out that most homicides with firearms are committed by one race? Would it be racist if the group were white? is it racist or sexist to point out that more than 90% of serial killers are white males?
facts are facts. if you have other facts... add em... if say the person had said.. Yeah but they were all poor with single parents or no parents... well, that would be relevant too. single parents and poor people might take offense tho I suppose.
If not being shot is important to you.... you might want to avoid poor black neighborhoods or... you might want to go armed if you can't. The information is useful.
If you are going about trying to solve a problem like say, firearms homicides.... to ignore what groups are doing what is just stupid. unless of course... you have an agenda that has nothing to do with actually solving the problem.
lazs
-
Rip,
I've found from my chats here in the office that despite oodles of information, facts and more...the biased opinions of some people can't be turned.
When someone is convinced their views are absolute, the discussion has ended.
I go thru a lot of that here...but that's another long long thread on coworkers who think the world owes them free healthcare and other things for their special needs kid.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
The facts are that in the USA blacks do have a higher death rate due to violence and a higher incarceration rate. That is a fact. But the reasons for it are much more complicated and difficult than a simpleminded "Blacks are just that way".
Not sure if you are attributing an assumption to me by my post. If so then you are typical of those that cry racist anytime someone mentions skin color.
Since MT didn't bite but you did I'll explain my post. It is the black community that is crying foul over the disproportionately large number of black males in prison. Citing numbers based solely on race is a two edged sword. If it is appropriate to cite one (stats of a race in prison) then it is appropriate to cite the other (stats of crimes committed by that race). Sorry, but you just can't have it both ways.
-
Question:
Is bringing up facts and data racist today?
Why do liberals get so bent out of shape when faced with facts and data?
Facts and data are never racist, but that isn't the problem. The problem is that the other person is infering that you have drawn racist conclusions from the data. That is what needs to be addressed.
This is exactly the issue that is the basis for all the controversy surrounding the book, "The Bell Curve" (Herrnstein & Murray, New York: The Free Press, 1994).
-
Didn't read through the whole thread, but here goes...
The fact isn't racist. Your determination that the number difference is because of black culture could be construed to be racist, however. The number disparity could be for any number of reasons, such as economic, environmental, etc...
i.e. your results would be totally different if you didn't count all white people vs. all black people, which as a whole do not have the same socio-economic standing, and instead counted whites and blacks in similar situations. For instance, how many gun death's per 100,000 poor, jobless white people living in inner city housing projects would there be compared to blacks in the same situation? I'd bet that if the numbers weren't virtually the same they'd at least be a hell of a lot closer. Likewise, if you only counted blacks that worked for Boeing, drove beemers and lived in the suburbs and compared them against white's in the same socio-economic situation, your numbers would be closer if not identical as well.
That study would need to have more breakdowns of white/black gun violence and show that economics and enviornment have a negligble effect on the statistics for it to really support your argument that black culture is the primary reason behind their gun-related deaths, Rip.
-
This isn't a PC matter of calling people negroes, blacks or african-americans. It is about perceptions and causes. If somebody claims that black men have a higher death rate due to violence and a higher incarceration rate because blacks are just more violent and lawless that is racist.
as I understood the origanal conversation, no real mentions as to why black males had a higher rate. as I read it he just pointed out that when you compare the 2 cities, detroit did have a higher incedent of gun violence, but it also has a very large population of people who are statistacally at a very high risk for being involved in it while the canadian city didn't as high of rates of gun violence, it also didn't have as big of a population of high risk individuals. and that this could explain the difference in gun violence rates just as easily as canadas atni-handgun laws.
I saw no mention of speculation as to why young black males are more likely to be involved in gun violence. thats an area where the ground gets shakey and opinions could be taken as racist.
but I don't see how pointing out the facts without speculation can be seen as racist.
-
Originally posted by Leslie
It sounds like deductive reasoning to me MT. Please tell me if it's not, and what kind of reasoning it is.
Les
I thought my response to Rip was pretty clear. "Culture" is a poor excuse AFAIC. There is NOTHING racist about the numbers. The racism comes from the conclusions.
Saying Detroit is dangerous because it has a large Black population is racist. Saying Detroit is dangerous because of the high unemployment rate among young males, especially Balck males is not racist.
almost forgot.... Actually seems more inductive to me Leslie.
-
midnight Target: I believe you aren't a racist Rip, however this statement seems very racist. You cannot necessarily attribute the high crime rate to race. It may be due to economics, unemployment rate, single parent families etc.
Actually intelligence as a major cause and culture as a secondary one. Studies indicate that all those factors you've listed are consequences rather than independent causes. There are authoritative studies that carefully investigate the influence of any single factor by equalising all the rest. Like NLSY (National Longitudinal Survey of Youth). NLSY79 involved a representative sample of 12,686 young men and women and NLSY97 9000.
Your figures are correct, your conclusions are suspect.
They would be if he was telling something that he came up with himself and that was all the data the world had. In fact he referred to the vast body of studies and was speaking in context of which she might not have been aware but could easily access.
Just because he did not cover every aspect of those studies in a single breath to show their completeness, does not mean that there is no data to substantiate his claim that "the culture is at fault".
Human communication always comes in chunks - sentenses and phrases. Latching up to a signle utterance and decrying it as "unsubstantiated" without waiting or asking for substantiation or looking it up is a just dirty trick to win an argument. Here is an example from your own mouth:
midnight Target: Saying Detroit is dangerous because it has a large Black population is racist. Saying Detroit is dangerous because of the high unemployment rate among young males, especially Balck males is not racist.
Of course it is! So you accuse blacks of being incapable of work, and being bad parents rather than more likely to commit crime. How is your post less racially offencive or more substantiated than Rip's?
Rip - as long as you do not treat individuals you deal with differently on account of their race, you are not a racist, no matter what you think or believe about their race as a statistical aggregate.
miko
-
Of course it is! So you accuse blacks of being incapable of work, and being bad parents rather than more likely to commit crime.
You assume too much... which makes you look less than intelligent. I accused no one of anything. I merely pointed out the difference between the attribution of a statistic to a RACE and to a CIRCUMSTANCE.
I would be willing to bet that there are more criminals with the last name "Chan" than any other last name in the world.
Did their last name make them criminal? Did their race make them criminal? Did the fact that there are more Chan's than any other last name make them criminal?
Holding the belief that one race is inherently more intelligent than another is racist too. Just so you know.
-
Holding the belief that one race is inherently more intelligent than another is racist too. Just so you know. - MT
Racism is defined this way in one dictionary:
Racism:
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
I agree that holding the belief that one specific race is inherently more intelligent than another is not a correct position to take - not because it puts the believer at risk of being labled racist or because it is politically incorrect - but because it has not been scientifically shown to be true. At least not to my satisfaction.
I think that it is entirely possible that one race can have in its gene pool traits that are expressed as higher "intelligence." Why would this be so hard to believe?
The problem is that intelligence is a construct that has never been universally defined to my knowledge, especially its expression in relationhip to the surrounding environment - the old nature vs nurture thing.
Furthermore, there is no common definition of "race." For example, most studies allow participants to identify thier own race, yet I can assure you that in Detroit there are very few pure blooded black people.
I have as much a problem with people who insist all races are genetically equal as I do with those who say that one race is superior to another in intelligence. I need to see proof, via sound scientific studies. So far, I do not think anyone has completed any definitive work that is widely accepted and non-controversial. This illustrates how complex the subject is.
-
Heres the problem folks.
People still have the mentality of races!
like black race or white race.
How bout the truth for once.
there is but one race of humans.
You got it THE HUMAN RACE.
Like the late Dr King said judge me on the content of my character
not the color of my skin.
So when people stop grouping people in neat little box's blacks over here and whites over here then maybe we will mature past this race bullchit.
Whether you believe or not God or the creator spirit what ever you call him.
Created all men.
White and black must all grow up and live in peace.
Learn from each culture expand you mind and your heart will follow.
To hate is only to cheapen your own soul.
-
^^^Exactly^^^
But, sadly, there is the false illusion of race, built on centuries of ignorant racism. This false illusion is already ingrained in society.
For example, if a group of blacks are treated like criminals who would never amount to anything, denied jobs, etc. Then they will act like that. They have no other choice, their behavior was imposed on them.
Hence you see these troubling numbers of black aggression, etc.
But its not race specific, through history there are plenty of examples of exactly the same thing happening with groups from every "race"
Its a vicious cycle, but thankfully, its slowly being broken, because people are beginning to open their minds and realise that their fears and misconceptions are based on simple ignorance.
-
I find in my day to day life that its easier just to divide people into one of two catagories: Either you're an prettythanghole or you are Not An prettythanghole.
The problem is, most of us have a little bit of prettythanghole in us, so you have to carefully observe for a little while before making up your mind about a person... :)
-
LOL - never thought I'd see the word "Ethics" in a thread title on this board. Had to check to see I was on the right board!
Rip, I have discussed this issue with a friend of mine in the US - a black guy. We discussed gun ownership, but not so much which group of people gets killed the most by guns.
I am sure that certain English black minority groups are no different from those in the US, and we too would have a bloodbath if guns were freely available. Some might say that those deaths "wouldn't matter", but the sort of carnage that we could expect in our cities if guns were to be freely available is not something the British public wants to see.
-
so there is no cultural difference between blacks and whites that would make pointing out the homicide issue relevent?
You would be wrong if you pointed out the disparity in the homicide issue?
seems best to point out every factor.
why do I know that most serial killers are white males? Would it be helpful to ignore the fact and say that they were "just people"?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
why do I know that most serial killers are white males? Would it be helpful to ignore the fact and say that they were "just people"?
lazs
It would have been most helpful during the DC sniper case.
-
You just have to be careful about what conclusions you draw from the data. You have to remember that correlations do not necessarily indicate cause and effect, and they can be totally misleading.
For example, lets say that colleges become convinced that a predictor of success in college is a person's height. The colleges might then proceed to admit only those students who are 6 foot tall or more.
Eventually, you will observe that most of the people in higher paying jobs are 6 foot tall, or higher. You would see an apparent correlation between 6 foot height and earning ability. The problem with this is that the correlation between height and earning power is a false one - an invention, a self-fulfilling prophecy. We cannot accurately conclude from this correlation that 6 footers have more earning ability than shorter persons, or that shorter persons do not have as great an earning potential, although the temptation to do so is strong.
However, that said, I believe that humans are "hard wired" to be racists. Its the most natural thing in the world to categorise people according to skin color, or religeon, or nationality or what have you. That is why you have to tread carefully when discussing these issues in general terms. We are all prey to our own points of view and our human tendancy to jump to conclusions. (Jumping to conclusions is related to survival.)
I agree with Animal, that the concept of race can be misleading. I also agree with Miko 2d that as long as you treat individuals fairly, you won't go too far wrong.
-
The problem is people sometimes put distinctions on themselves... African Americans, Latin Americans, etc... I always figured we were all just Americans. I suppose dinstinctions are somewhat necessary in the issues of racism, etc... But I wish they weren't.
Also, crying wolf all the time regarding incidents of racism takes away from the credence of the valid ones which occur.
-
I've been accused of jumping on the racism bandwagon before. In this case however, I don't think I have. I think Rip's original statement could be construed as racist and I can understand the reation of his coworker.
I also said I don't think Rip is a racist.
-
MT, I don't think you are being fair to Ripsnort.
I think he was pointing out a correlation between young blacks and violent crime, along with his opinion that those same conditions do not exist in Windsor - making it an unequal comparison in their discussion.
Is there in fact a correlation between young blacks and violent crime?
(probably yes)
Do those same conditions in fact exist in Windsor?
(probably no)
Is it an unfair comparison in their discussion?
Yes! - I think so anyway.
I don't think we have to conclude that the statement is a racist one ... as did the young lady. It sounds to me like he only pointed out a correlation... and she made the leap to racism. Next time, Ripsnort needs to make his points more clearly, knowing as we do that people all have their own biases.
You can lay the blame for this whole thing at the feet of Michael Moore, with his quick and easy swipes at America that are often very misleading. In my opinion, that is.
-
yikes... even when i try to be fair I'm accused of being unfair... ahh well.
Lets disect this then...
Rip said I said "When you compare Detroit to any city for violence, the facts will be skewed because of the fact that Detroit has a higher than avg. population of blacks, .
Now I know he threw in the "culture" thing there also, but read that quote again. Anything that follows will seam like an excuse for the opening. The Black population was the 1st thing he mentioned.
Now I reiterate - I don't thing Rip is a racist. But even well meaning folks can say racist hurtful things.
-
midnight Target: I merely pointed out the difference between the attribution of a statistic to a RACE and to a CIRCUMSTANCE.
But crime level is as much a circumstance as divorce rate, illegitimacy and unemployment.
Rip says that blacks are more prone to crime.
You say that crime is just the concequence of the fact that blacks are more prone to illegitimacy and unemployment.
How come your statement any less racist?
Holding the belief that one race is inherently more intelligent than another is racist too. Just so you know.
As Gunthr explained, as long as I base my opinion on scientific studies, I may be mistaken but not necessarily racist.
I would be racist if I preffered this situation.
miko
-
You say that crime is just the concequence of the fact that blacks are more prone to illegitimacy and unemployment.
You assume again... gotta quit doing that.
I never said they were more prone to it. Being prone to something implies that it is inherent to the people in question. Poverty isn't inherent to anyone. It is thrust upon them.
-
midnight Target: I never said they were more prone to it. Being prone to something implies that it is inherent to the people in question. Poverty isn't inherent to anyone. It is thrust upon them.
OK, a poverty can be thrust upon some race by outsiders who are racists. I would certainly agree that it is true and was actually the case for the most of US history regarding blacks and indians and others.
But how do you thrust illegitimacy and destruction of marriage on someone?
People living in much worse conditions now and in the past times still kept to family life, cared for their children, etc.
BTW, having one parent in a family means one or zero incomes while having two adults means having two or one income. Don't you think it has any bearing on the poverty?
miko
-
But how do you thrust illegitimacy and destruction of marriage on someone?
Through poverty.
-
MT, if one person rose above poverty, does that not mean that anyone can? Re: it being imposed.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Through poverty.
You are reaching MT.
-
'cultural difference' implies racism imo.
Socio-economic derieved from a long history of racism would be more accurate.
You can't state that it is Black Culture for black men to kill each other without expecting to be called a racist.
-
Originally posted by Gadfly
MT, if one person rose above poverty, does that not mean that anyone can? Re: it being imposed.
Given identical skills, drive, social pressures, opportunities and circumstances....... maybe.
-
You know the saying: There's lies, damm lies and statistics.
That's the problem Ripsnort, you can use statistics to bolster any argument.
More Blacks are killed by guns could mean any number of things. Whites could be killing them, easy availability of guns could be the reason, Blacks are naturally more violent, more Blacks are poor and poverty leads to crime etc etc.
Let's see if I can read both your minds, she is against guns and the facts are there, that the easier availability of guns in the US leads to more gun deaths. That is a 'fact' you don't like and disagree with. You are in favour of guns and point out the 'fact' that most gun deaths are among Black males. The implication, whether you believe it or not, is that Black males are more prone to gun violence. Thus guns are not the problem but Black males are.
In fact it's more likely that males between a certain age living in reduced circumstances and in a high crime environment may be more prone to gun violence no matter what the colour. Now it is quite possible that in fact it is true to say that Black males are more prone to gun violence than white males. But because of historical racism this isn't a popular option.
To sum up both your arguments, whether real or implied. She thinks the American gun culture leads to excessive gun deaths. You believe it's a Black culture thing. You may both be right but the nature of debate is that we do not agree with each other all the time and we all have our own biases and prejudices.
-
blue... it is not whites that are killing blacks it is blacks who are killing blacks. the reasons are for others to figure out. A lot has to do with what race is at what end of the drug dealing food chain tho.
MT... serial killers... are the DC killers "serial killers" ? they are a pair... most serial killers are singles but.... most importantly... the reason they were killing... it was money. They were simply trying a hostage scam on a different scale and with a twist. I don't think they really fall under the tittle of "serial killer".
lazs
-
Some interesting arguements up above.