Woman calls cops another Black Jogger

Page 47 of 47 [ 746 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47

QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623

18 Jul 2020, 6:39 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
QFT wrote:

Racism is a reality, and reverse racism is a reality too. What both sides are guilty of is that they only admit one of the two and deny the other of the two. If you look at them together things don't look nearly as simple.


Reverse racism is largely a canard trotted out in an intellectually dishonest attempt at false equivalency.


Just because the people that talk about it act ignorant doesn't mean that whatever they are talking about doesn't exist.

Here is my logic. Everything has a reason. So if there is a reverse racism, it has a reason too. The reason is actual racism. So the fact that reverse racism exists implies that actual racism exists. But then actual racism has a reason as well. The reason is criminal behavior of "some" blacks -- not all thought! In both cases, the issue is over-reaction. Racism is over-reaction to what "some" blacks do (generalization from some to all). Reverse racism is over-reaction to racism. And over-reaction is often bad news although I can see the reason behind it. Kind of like "war on terrorism" is an over-reaction to terrorism (which IS a threat by the way) but its bad because it results in too much security everywhere which costs our freedoms.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,849
Location: I'm on the streets like curbs

18 Jul 2020, 7:04 pm

This explains what I mean.

I've explained this to other posters before so I'm just going to respond with articles on the topic from now on.


_________________
Jesus was black, Ronald Reagan was the devil and the government is lying about 9/11.


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,181

18 Jul 2020, 8:02 pm

Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Actually if Christian Cooper was hypothetically shot by the police and the video wasn't uploaded then why would you think Amy Cooper would voluntarily divulge her lie to the police?


What "lie" are you referring to: That she had been threatened (her belief at the time) by an African-American male?


Sorry forgot the quotation marks " " around lie, this is what is being tested in court.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,181

18 Jul 2020, 8:10 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
This explains what I mean.

I've explained this to other posters before so I'm just going to respond with articles on the topic from now on.


There seems to be a vigorous debate in Australia about why reverse racism can't happen. I think white folk are coming forward saying things like....

- I am poor and hold no social privilege
- I went to a majority ethnic school and was bullied
- I missed on out college because of quotas
- I was accosted by a group of "insert ethnicity" and felt traumatised
- I was sexually harassed by a black man who called me names

Then of course there is PoC which is a term only white people recognise because the hundreds of different groups that fall under the PoC category hate each other more than they hate white people. Good example is East Asians and hispanics who live in America who hate black people more than they hate whites (they have been trying to assimilate into the latter group since the 1800s).



League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 24,378
Location: Pacific Northwest

18 Jul 2020, 9:15 pm

QFT wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
Black people are always suspicious.


If you say so. Seems a racist statement\assumption to make, though - But as that's your opinion, who am I to question it.

On the other hand, a male saying "I'm going to do what I want and you may not like it" to a female IS suspicious (at the very least).


Are you really complaining that LG is aware and keeps racist attitudes in our society in mind while you seem intent on consistently ignoring them while defending these sorts of actions? She isn't the one engaging in the problematic behaviour.


Not quite sure what you're trying to say here?

LG was stating that black people are always suspicious: I was pointing out that thinking that black people are always suspicious was a racist statement\assumption she was making. I'm personally no more suspicious of them than any other person in any given situation, and prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt rather than claim "racism" when it suits my "side".


You misunderstood. I was saying black people are always suspicious because people are often calling cops on them because of their inner bias about black people.

If you are aware of this racial issue, you would have understood what I was saying. funeralxempire totally understood my meaning because he is always the one calling out racism and pointing out racial issues many of us miss because of our white privilege.


I understood what you meant. When RobotLives said that its justifiable to report suspicious people, you said that this mindset might victimize blacks because blacks are *perceived to be* suspicious in some people's eyes. However, you were not saying blacks actually "are" suspicious, you were saying Whites are racist thats why they "wrongly see them" as such. And saying they are suspicious was just a sarcastic way of saying so.

I think the reason Brictoria took it too literally is due to the fact that people with Asperger take things literally and miss the sarcasm. I think this sarcasm was quite obvious. I might disagree with it, but I know what you meant.

But back to the main point of the discussion, the reason I disagree with your point is that I feel there is a double standard. If someone is perceived to be suspicious due to different kind of prejudice -- say, that person has Asperger and is socially awkward -- then its okay to report them; but if someone is perceived to be suspicious due to racial prejudice then its not. There is even a term for it, "protected minorities", if you are one of the "protected" minorities you can't be judged on this basis but if you are any other kind of minority then you can be.

Now, I understand that its a difficult question. On the one hand suspicious people "should" be reported since its better to prevent the crime than to face the consequences of a crime. But on the other hand prejudice should not be encouraged, whether it is racial prejudice or any other kind of prejudice. I guess there is no easy answer to this question. But whatever the answer is, I just don't like the double standard where blacks, gays and few other "protected minorities" are the only ones that can't be judged.



If people have been following my posts here, they would know I was being sarcastic because it contradicts what I am arguing about.

BTW if an autistic person is seen as suspicious when all they are doing is just window shopping and looking around, that would be ableism. Though this would be difficult because autistic people look like everyone else so someone would have no way of knowing they are autistic. Plus lot of people don't even know what autism looks like if they have never experienced it and never knew anyone with it.

Skin color is obvious, autism is not unless they are that severe.


_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed.

Daughter: NT, no diagnoses.


QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623

18 Jul 2020, 9:42 pm

League_Girl wrote:
If people have been following my posts here, they would know I was being sarcastic because it contradicts what I am arguing about.


I actually said in the first paragraph of my previous reply that I knew you were sarcastic. Re-read what I wrote.

League_Girl wrote:
BTW if an autistic person is seen as suspicious when all they are doing is just window shopping and looking around, that would be ableism. Though this would be difficult because autistic people look like everyone else so someone would have no way of knowing they are autistic. Plus lot of people don't even know what autism looks like if they have never experienced it and never knew anyone with it.

Skin color is obvious, autism is not unless they are that severe.


Autism affects body postures and facial expression. In my case, I forget to tuck in my shirt, brush my hair, etc. Also my voice is loud and monotone. So people can easily tell something is wrong. And I believe this is the main thing that holds me back socially. As far as learning not to argue with people and not to go on and on about the same thing, I can learn to do that. But as far as the non-verbal things listed above, they are the ones that make the whole thing moot since nobody approaches me to begin with.



League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 24,378
Location: Pacific Northwest

18 Jul 2020, 9:48 pm

QFT wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
If people have been following my posts here, they would know I was being sarcastic because it contradicts what I am arguing about.


I actually said in the first paragraph of my previous reply that I knew you were sarcastic. Re-read what I wrote.



I know what you wrote, you said that Brictoria took me literal and I was saying people who have been following my posts should know I was being sarcastic because of the contradiction. I read his post more of a gotcha.


_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed.

Daughter: NT, no diagnoses.


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,342
Location: Melbourne, Australia

18 Jul 2020, 10:27 pm

League_Girl wrote:
QFT wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
If people have been following my posts here, they would know I was being sarcastic because it contradicts what I am arguing about.


I actually said in the first paragraph of my previous reply that I knew you were sarcastic. Re-read what I wrote.



I know what you wrote, you said that Brictoria took me literal and I was saying people who have been following my posts should know I was being sarcastic because of the contradiction. I read his post more of a gotcha.


Minor note: I don't particularly follow anyone's posts here in particular, and except for a certain very few members whose posts follow a very narrow line (Such as those with a very hostile view of people with an orange skin tone, or those who support diversity in all things except thought) I would have no idea (or interest) in previous posts, nor would I (or any new member reading the thread) have any reason to take the post at anything other than face value.

Not everyone here will be enough of a fan (or care enough to remember) previous posts by another member, and some may not have even seen these past posts to begin with.


_________________
Quote:
"When people express opinions that differ from yours, take it as a chance to grow. Seek to understand over being understood. Be curious, not defensive. The only way to disarm another human being is by listening." - Glennon Doyle Melton


League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 24,378
Location: Pacific Northwest

19 Jul 2020, 12:20 am

Brictoria wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
QFT wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
If people have been following my posts here, they would know I was being sarcastic because it contradicts what I am arguing about.


I actually said in the first paragraph of my previous reply that I knew you were sarcastic. Re-read what I wrote.



I know what you wrote, you said that Brictoria took me literal and I was saying people who have been following my posts should know I was being sarcastic because of the contradiction. I read his post more of a gotcha.


Minor note: I don't particularly follow anyone's posts here in particular, and except for a certain very few members whose posts follow a very narrow line (Such as those with a very hostile view of people with an orange skin tone, or those who support diversity in all things except thought) I would have no idea (or interest) in previous posts, nor would I (or any new member reading the thread) have any reason to take the post at anything other than face value.

Not everyone here will be enough of a fan (or care enough to remember) previous posts by another member, and some may not have even seen these past posts to begin with.


So you're telling me you don't pay attention to who writes what and when you read posts in threads, you don't bother to look at the user name first and then read the post?


_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed.

Daughter: NT, no diagnoses.


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,342
Location: Melbourne, Australia

19 Jul 2020, 1:31 am

League_Girl wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
QFT wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
If people have been following my posts here, they would know I was being sarcastic because it contradicts what I am arguing about.


I actually said in the first paragraph of my previous reply that I knew you were sarcastic. Re-read what I wrote.



I know what you wrote, you said that Brictoria took me literal and I was saying people who have been following my posts should know I was being sarcastic because of the contradiction. I read his post more of a gotcha.


Minor note: I don't particularly follow anyone's posts here in particular, and except for a certain very few members whose posts follow a very narrow line (Such as those with a very hostile view of people with an orange skin tone, or those who support diversity in all things except thought) I would have no idea (or interest) in previous posts, nor would I (or any new member reading the thread) have any reason to take the post at anything other than face value.

Not everyone here will be enough of a fan (or care enough to remember) previous posts by another member, and some may not have even seen these past posts to begin with.


So you're telling me you don't pay attention to who writes what and when you read posts in threads, you don't bother to look at the user name first and then read the post?


I don't go back and look at a members posting history, no, nor should I need to. I consider individual posts on their content (and with regards to what they have "quoted" within them), as it is too easy for multiple sub-threads to branch off within an individual topic, leading to misunderstandings and confusion. I also like to get information from multiple sources, and consider the content of the post, not the person who posted it (in general), when deciding on the value of the information supplied.

Similarly, I understand that it is possible for some people to change their minds/opinions when presented with new facts\information, and basing opinions of a person on something from the past (in general), which they no longer believe\act in that way would be unfair to them as a person.

Finally, I don't have an unlimited capacity to remember every member of every forum\website I use and their opinions. I only remember "important" members, whether because they have a history of providing interesting information\insights, posts which are indecipherable, or because they have been offensive towards myself (or others) in the past, any of which may colour my opinion of information being supplied by those members.


_________________
Quote:
"When people express opinions that differ from yours, take it as a chance to grow. Seek to understand over being understood. Be curious, not defensive. The only way to disarm another human being is by listening." - Glennon Doyle Melton