MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: muwarrior69 on May 06, 2018, 02:10:13 PM
-
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10860
-
Thank God Marquette is going to create more safe spaces. The white man's hubris is ubiquitous.
-
I think the university response so far has been appropriate. Unfortunately, there's not much the university can do in these cases. Sending out racist pictures is not a violation of the student rules. You can condemn it, but you can't punish it. Hard place for Lovell to be in. One side is screaming "this is PC BS" and the other side is screaming "crucify them", neither one is correct.
-
Didn't know we are ALL hillbillies.
-
I think the "author" of that completely "objective" article might want to lay off the use of "quote" marks just "a little."
-
Just felt myself get dumber and sadder for having read that.
-
Is this the summary?
* 3 randoms and one MU student take a stupid picture that has a toy black doll and guns. (whatever the hell that means.)
* Picture is a year old.
* Picture was taken out of state, so 100+ miles away from campus.
* Some group holds a forum about race and respect at MU that irks people
* Also of note, this tweet which doesn't make sense, but one would think violates student conduct code: https://twitter.com/SaintSamantha1/status/989368373262868480
-
Solutions looking for a problem.
-
Dr. Lovell may possess Catholic spiritual purity but he lacks backbone. Can Fr. Wild be recycled one more time?
-
Dr. Lovell may possess Catholic spiritual purity but he lacks backbone.
Explain.
-
Is this the summary?
* 3 randoms and one MU student take a stupid picture that has a toy black doll and guns. (whatever the hell that means.)
* Picture is a year old.
* Picture was taken out of state, so 100+ miles away from campus.
* Some group holds a forum about race and respect at MU that irks people
* Also of note, this tweet which doesn't make sense, but one would think violates student conduct code https://twitter.com/SaintSamantha1/status/989368373262868480
How does it violate the student conduct code?
-
Yeah I’m not exactly sure what Marquette did wrong here.
-
Put an Arby's on every corner. Micromeat spaces raise all tides.
-
How does it violate the student conduct code?
Hmmm .. telling the President of the University to go f*ck themselves in a public forum ..
How about ..
"Physically or verbally abusing or threatening any person, on or off the campus, including especially such persons as student staff and Marquette University Police Department officers."
Or ..
"Participating in .. harassment, which includes actions or situations that do or could result in mental, emotional or physical discomfort, embarrassment, ridicule or endangerment whether intentionally, for fun or by consent."
Now, Lovell is a big boy and can take it, but frankly, I'd prefer zero students who post such a thing ever proudly hoist a MU diploma.
-
Hmmm .. telling the President of the University to go f*ck themselves in a public forum ..
How about ..
"Physically or verbally abusing or threatening any person, on or off the campus, including especially such persons as student staff and Marquette University Police Department officers."
Or ..
"Participating in .. harassment, which includes actions or situations that do or could result in mental, emotional or physical discomfort, embarrassment, ridicule or endangerment whether intentionally, for fun or by consent."
Now, Lovell is a big boy and can take it, but frankly, I'd prefer zero students who post such a thing ever proudly hoist a MU diploma.
So students can't have opinions? Right or wrong that ain't even close to anything that would warrant suspension or expulsion.
I like Lovell a lot, and as you said he's a big boy. How many times have we told people to eff themselves? I probably yell it in my car on a daily basis. Never directly to a person but that's really no different than twitter.
-
There was one crummy incident, which the university called out immediately as unacceptable. If there other specific incidents or biases, then they should identify them specifically so everyone at the university can put an end to it immediately. Crying about "white privilege" and labeling (unnamed) students as racist hillbillies only serves to further divide.
-
So students can't have opinions? Right or wrong that ain't even close to anything that would warrant suspension or expulsion.
I didn't say anything remotely near "students can't have opinions." Being disrespectful in the extreme, especially in a public forum, is a clear conduct violation.
I like Lovell a lot, and as you said he's a big boy. How many times have we told people to eff themselves? I probably yell it in my car on a daily basis. Never directly to a person but that's really no different than twitter.
Twitter is a public forum, not in the same universe as yelling inside your car.
Telling a teacher, principal, director, chair, president, or your boss to go f*ck themselves, especially publicly, is not -- or should not be -- without consequence.
-
Hmmm .. telling the President of the University to go f*ck themselves in a public forum ..
How about ..
"Physically or verbally abusing or threatening any person, on or off the campus, including especially such persons as student staff and Marquette University Police Department officers."
Or ..
"Participating in .. harassment, which includes actions or situations that do or could result in mental, emotional or physical discomfort, embarrassment, ridicule or endangerment whether intentionally, for fun or by consent."
Now, Lovell is a big boy and can take it, but frankly, I'd prefer zero students who post such a thing ever proudly hoist a MU diploma.
Sorry to tell you, but if you punished a student for this that would result in the world's easiest lawsuit. That is free speech. Its douchey free speech but free speech none the less.
-
There was one crummy incident, which the university called out immediately as unacceptable. If there other specific incidents or biases, then they should identify them specifically so everyone at the university can put an end to it immediately. Crying about "white privilege" and labeling (unnamed) students as racist hillbillies only serves to further divide.
White privilege is an actual thing though.
-
Is it?
All white people are privileged?
-
Sorry to tell you, but if you punished a student for this that would result in the world's easiest lawsuit. That is free speech. Its douchey free speech but free speech none the less.
The light of day is the best punishment. The police - not MU - should name the student who did this.
-
There was one crummy incident, which the university called out immediately as unacceptable. If there other specific incidents or biases, then they should identify them specifically so everyone at the university can put an end to it immediately. Crying about "white privilege" and labeling (unnamed) students as racist hillbillies only serves to further divide.
While I agree with the 1st two sentences, I think your last one seems to say that you don't think white privilege occurs. What is your rationale? There is almost unlimited proof that it does exist.
If I am misunderstanding what you are saying, feel free to point that out.
-
Sorry to tell you, but if you punished a student for this that would result in the world's easiest lawsuit. That is free speech. Its douchey free speech but free speech none the less.
Marquette is a private institution, not bound by the 1st amendment. Google tells me so: "Private universities are not directly bound by the First Amendment, which limits only government action."
I'm happy to be schooled by a real lawyer, if any would like to chime in.
-
Can anyone explain why the picture was that racially charged?
-
Is it?
All white people are privileged?
Can you walk into a store without being followed or watched? Can you go to Starbucks for a business meeting without being asked to leave and have the police called?
You can. This is what White privilege means. You have the privilege of walking around without suspicion, and generally speaking being White affords you privileges that others are not.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gina-crosleycorcoran/explaining-white-privilege-to-a-broke-white-person_b_5269255.html (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gina-crosleycorcoran/explaining-white-privilege-to-a-broke-white-person_b_5269255.html)
-
Is it?
All white people are privileged?
To various degrees yes.
Do these incidents occur if the people were white? Very doubtful.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/mom-on-college-tour-calls-police-on-two-native-american-teens-they-made-her-nervous.html
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/3-black-women-surrounded-by-cops-after-leaving-airbnb-home-because-they-didnt-wave-at-the-neighbor.1577470/
Now does that mean every incident has a racial aspect to it? No. But pretending it doesn’t exist isn’t helpful.
-
Didn't know we are ALL hillbillies.
Hey, what did Buzz have to do with this?
-
Can you walk into a store without being followed or watched? Can you go to Starbucks for a business meeting without being asked to leave and have the police called?
You can. This is what White privilege means. You have the privilege of walking around without suspicion, and generally speaking being White affords you privileges that others are not.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gina-crosleycorcoran/explaining-white-privilege-to-a-broke-white-person_b_5269255.html (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gina-crosleycorcoran/explaining-white-privilege-to-a-broke-white-person_b_5269255.html)
Like playing in the NBA.
If you want to believe there is white privilege fine, but that does not mean I have to believe it's an actual thing.
-
I wonder how many attended that meeting and disagreed with the premise of white privilege.
-
Marquette is a private institution, not bound by the 1st amendment. Google tells me so: "Private universities are not directly bound by the First Amendment, which limits only government action."
I'm happy to be schooled by a real lawyer, if any would like to chime in.
This is true. It wouldn't be a first amendment violation. But it would be a contract violation. Part of Marquette's contract with students is that they guarantee first amendment rights. Its somewhere in all the paperwork you sign. Most private schools do this.
-
Is it?
All white people are privileged?
All white people have white privilege.
That doesn't necessarily mean all white people are privileged.
Everyone has some form of privilege. Theoretically, there could be a person out there with only minority identities but that would be hard to find. A black man doesn't have white privilege, but he does have male privilege. A black woman doesn't have white or male privilege but she could have straight privilege (assuming she's straight). A black lesbian doesn't have white, male or straight privilege, but she could have cisgender privilege (assuming she's not trans). A black trans lesbian doesn't have white, male, straight, or cisgender privilege, but could have Christian privilege (assuming she's Christian). A black trans lesbian athiest doesn't have white, male, straight, cisgender, or Christian privilege but could have ability privilege (assuming she isn't disabled)....and so on and so forth.
Privilege essentially means that you have an advantage over other people based on something that you had no control over. It's not a dirty word or something to be ashamed of. Everyone has varying levels of privilege and not all privileges are created equal. White privilege just happens to be one of the most visible and powerful.
-
While I agree with the 1st two sentences, I think your last one seems to say that you don't think white privilege occurs. What is your rationale? There is almost unlimited proof that it does exist.
If I am misunderstanding what you are saying, feel free to point that out.
I do believe it exists. I just believe that identifying specific examples or incidents (such as those cited a few posts up) is a better way to deal with the issue than claiming an entire campus is full of oppressive white privilege and fighting invisible demons. Removing the students who sent the disturbing image a couple weeks back is actionable. That the "white racist gun-loving hillbillies" exist isn't particularly actionable unless they have actually done something wrong.
Similarly, on the "worked twice as hard" to get into MU tweet - if any of that is MU's fault, as in they literally required her to have a higher GPA and SAT score than white students or she would not have been admitted, they should certainly take a hard look at their admission practices, at a minimum. There is actually some pretty compelling evidence that on the whole, schools discriminate against Asians, requiring higher test scores to be admitted, but it's been deemed a legal practice.
-
All white people have white privilege.
That doesn't necessarily mean all white people are privileged.
Everyone has some form of privilege. Theoretically, there could be a person out there with only minority identities but that would be hard to find. A black man doesn't have white privilege, but he does have male privilege. A black woman doesn't have white or male privilege but she could have straight privilege (assuming she's straight). A black lesbian doesn't have white, male or straight privilege, but she could have cisgender privilege (assuming she's not trans). A black trans lesbian doesn't have white, male, straight, or cisgender privilege, but could have Christian privilege (assuming she's Christian). A black trans lesbian athiest doesn't have white, male, straight, cisgender, or Christian privilege but could have ability privilege (assuming she isn't disabled)....and so on and so forth.
Privilege essentially means that you have an advantage over other people based on something that you had no control over. It's not a dirty word or something to be ashamed of. Everyone has varying levels of privilege and not all privileges are created equal. White privilege just happens to be one of the most visible and powerful.
Then why have a meeting about a topic that a majority of students have no control over and characterized in such a way that to some is perceived that just by being white is something to be ashamed and is "dirty".
-
Then why have a meeting about a topic that a majority of students have no control over and characterized in such a way that to some is perceived that just by being white is something to be ashamed and is "dirty".
Well to the first part, just because you have no control doesn't mean you shouldn't talk about. Those with privilege can use their privilege to support those without it. You know, like those pesky Jesuits preach.
To the second part, who is characterizing being white as something to be ashamed of or dirty? Having privilege isn't dirty and pointing out that someone has privilege isn't shaming. What your describing sounds more like personal discomfort.
-
Well to the first part, just because you have no control doesn't mean you shouldn't talk about. Those with privilege can use their privilege to support those without it. You know, like those pesky Jesuits preach.
To the second part, who is characterizing being white as something to be ashamed of or dirty? Having privilege isn't dirty and pointing out that someone has privilege isn't shaming. What your describing sounds more like personal discomfort.
TAMU, as I think you know, I have a lot of respect for you even though we disagree on some things. But I think that your last comment is unfair. Not focusing on this specific situation, there is an awful lot going on out there that absolutely treats people like white privilege is something to be ashamed of, and if you don't recognize and appreciate that, you're missing one reason why this is a hard conversation for us to have as a country. To simply chalk it up to "personal discomfort" does not help the dialogue. The use of hateful and racist terms like "hillbillies" so freely is a fairly good example that there are plenty who are trying to equate white privilege with something shameful. You either know this to be true, or you have a pretty significant blind spot.
-
All white people have white privilege.
That doesn't necessarily mean all white people are privileged.
Everyone has some form of privilege. Theoretically, there could be a person out there with only minority identities but that would be hard to find. A black man doesn't have white privilege, but he does have male privilege. A black woman doesn't have white or male privilege but she could have straight privilege (assuming she's straight). A black lesbian doesn't have white, male or straight privilege, but she could have cisgender privilege (assuming she's not trans). A black trans lesbian doesn't have white, male, straight, or cisgender privilege, but could have Christian privilege (assuming she's Christian). A black trans lesbian athiest doesn't have white, male, straight, cisgender, or Christian privilege but could have ability privilege (assuming she isn't disabled)....and so on and so forth.
Privilege essentially means that you have an advantage over other people based on something that you had no control over. It's not a dirty word or something to be ashamed of. Everyone has varying levels of privilege and not all privileges are created equal. White privilege just happens to be one of the most visible and powerful.
(https://multifiles.pressherald.com/uploads/sites/2/2012/01/1edit_reisert_king.jpg)
-
Well to the first part, just because you have no control doesn't mean you shouldn't talk about. Those with privilege can use their privilege to support those without it. You know, like those pesky Jesuits preach.
To the second part, who is characterizing being white as something to be ashamed of or dirty? Having privilege isn't dirty and pointing out that someone has privilege isn't shaming. What your describing sounds more like personal discomfort.
The Title of the meeting:
Do better Marquette. What does it mean to be part of a culture that perpetuates racism? Join us for a conversation about your role as part of the white community at Marquette.
So just by being white we perpetuate racism. Is not that something to be ashamed? If I flipped black for white in the above title it would be characterized as racist, would it not? Quite frankly I am not sure how that improves race relations when just by being white which is out of our control we perpetuate racism.
-
This is true. It wouldn't be a first amendment violation. But it would be a contract violation. Part of Marquette's contract with students is that they guarantee first amendment rights. Its somewhere in all the paperwork you sign. Most private schools do this.
In that contract, you are also signing a student code of conduct, which, as I quoted above, curtails that freedom of speech, to wit:
"Physically or verbally abusing or threatening any person, on or off the campus, including especially such persons as student staff and Marquette University Police Department officers."
Or ..
"Participating in .. harassment, which includes actions or situations that do or could result in mental, emotional or physical discomfort, embarrassment, ridicule or endangerment whether intentionally, for fun or by consent."
In short .. students do have the freedom to express their minds and beliefs, up to the point of being verbally abusive or harassing, at which they are in violation of the code of conduct and can be disciplined in the manner the code lays out, which includes expulsion.
-
TAMU, as I think you know, I have a lot of respect for you even though we disagree on some things. But I think that your last comment is unfair. Not focusing on this specific situation, there is an awful lot going on out there that absolutely treats people like white privilege is something to be ashamed of, and if you don't recognize and appreciate that, you're missing one reason why this is a hard conversation for us to have as a country. To simply chalk it up to "personal discomfort" does not help the dialogue. The use of hateful and racist terms like "hillbillies" so freely is a fairly good example that there are plenty who are trying to equate white privilege with something shameful. You either know this to be true, or you have a pretty significant blind spot.
I don't think I phrased it very well. What I was getting at is that a lot of people make assumptions about events like the one happening at Marquette. They assume that all that will happen at the event is blaming and shaming and making white people feel guilty for being white. While I am sure events like that do happen, my experience is that most or seeking an open dialogue on how to acknowledge and use white privilege to great a more equal and just society. Don't judge a book by its cover I guess is what I'm getting at.
-
(https://multifiles.pressherald.com/uploads/sites/2/2012/01/1edit_reisert_king.jpg)
Great speech.
Make sure you read the whole thing and not just the pretty quote that everyone knows:
https://www.archives.gov/files/press/exhibits/dream-speech.pdf
-
In that contract, you are also signing a student code of conduct, which, as I quoted above, curtails that freedom of speech, to wit:
"Physically or verbally abusing or threatening any person, on or off the campus, including especially such persons as student staff and Marquette University Police Department officers."
Or ..
"Participating in .. harassment, which includes actions or situations that do or could result in mental, emotional or physical discomfort, embarrassment, ridicule or endangerment whether intentionally, for fun or by consent."
In short .. students do have the freedom to express their minds and beliefs, up to the point of being verbally abusive or harassing, at which they are in violation of the code of conduct and can be disciplined in the manner the code lays out, which includes expulsion.
I am telling you hilltopper. I work in student conduct and compliance. If Marquette punishes a student for saying "f*ck you" to anybody, they will be sued for breach and contract and lose. "F*ck you" is not a threat, nor is it persistent or pervasive enough to constitute abuse or harassment. Like Glow said, the best punishment in this situation is the light of day.
-
nm
-
The Title of the meeting:
Do better Marquette. What does it mean to be part of a culture that perpetuates racism? Join us for a conversation about your role as part of the white community at Marquette.
So just by being white we perpetuate racism. Is not that something to be ashamed? If I flipped black for white in the above title it would be characterized as racist, would it not? Quite frankly I am not sure how that improves race relations when just by being white which is out of our control we perpetuate racism.
This isn't what the sign is saying. There is a difference between being white and white culture. Being white doesn't perpetuate racism but participating in white culture does.
You essentially have two choices on what to do with white privilege. You can ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist, which perpetuates racism. Or you can acknowledge it and try to use it to help your fellow man which fights racism. I would imagine that is this what this event is meant to be about. Though I could be wrong. Students sometimes do dumb things despite good intentions.
I think a big barrier here is the use of the "R word." Some people are so uncomfortable with being associated with racism that it immediately shuts down any conversation. Everyone does racist things every day. I do. You do. Trump does. Obama does. Christians do. Athiests do. Everyone does. Everyone commits racist actions and has racist thoughts, but it doesn't make them racists, it just makes them human. I have only met 3 or 4 genuine bonafide racists in my entire life. But I have met thousands of humans who sometimes do or say racist things.
-
I am telling you hilltopper. I work in student conduct and compliance. If Marquette punishes a student for saying "f*ck you" to anybody, they will be sued for breach and contract and lose. "F*ck you" is not a threat, nor is it persistent or pervasive enough to constitute abuse or harassment. Like Glow said, the best punishment in this situation is the light of day.
So you as long as you don't "persistently or pervasively" harass or abuse someone, no problem? That's quite a loophole -- one that's not mentioned in the quoted text, I should add.
You should have said you work in student conduct up front, as I respect the expertise. That being said, it's a shame you (and departments) don't think and wouldn't prosecute this as a code of conduct violation. If you can say "go f*ck yourself" to the University President, in public no less, and not be disciplined for that, that code of conduct is just a bunch of fluff.
-
Great speech.
Make sure you read the whole thing and not just the pretty quote that everyone knows:
https://www.archives.gov/files/press/exhibits/dream-speech.pdf
This. Even the pretty quote is "live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin" - not "live in a nation that declines to acknowledge the color of their skin." I think we had another related conversation of this in another (probably rightfully locked) thread, but while I have a lot of sympathy/empathy for everyone that was raised to be "colorblind" that doesn't mean it works. Aiming to be colorblind is a skin deep (pun intended) solution to a much deeper problem. It turns "racism" into something that we all try to prove we aren't, but blinds us to the institutional disadvantages of the system that we reinforce everyday... while simultaneously and dissonantly trying to prove we aren't interpersonally racist.
-
I think a big barrier here is the use of the "R word." Some people are so uncomfortable with being associated with racism that it immediately shuts down any conversation. Everyone does racist things every day. I do. You do. Trump does. Obama does. Christians do. Athiests do. Everyone does. Everyone commits racist actions and has racist thoughts, but it doesn't make them racists, it just makes them human. I have only met 3 or 4 genuine bonafide racists in my entire life. But I have met thousands of humans who sometimes do or say racist things.
I agree with this quite a lot. I think if more people would use the word as a adjective instead of a noun, it would go a long way toward promoting meaningful discourse.
-
Sorry to tell you, but if you punished a student for this that would result in the world's easiest lawsuit. That is free speech. Its douchey free speech but free speech none the less.
Every example is different. Pretty sure you can't tell your boss or teacher to F off.
-
This isn't what the sign is saying. There is a difference between being white and white culture. Being white doesn't perpetuate racism but participating in white culture does.
You essentially have two choices on what to do with white privilege. You can ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist, which perpetuates racism. Or you can acknowledge it and try to use it to help your fellow man which fights racism. I would imagine that is this what this event is meant to be about. Though I could be wrong. Students sometimes do dumb things despite good intentions.
I think a big barrier here is the use of the "R word." Some people are so uncomfortable with being associated with racism that it immediately shuts down any conversation. Everyone does racist things every day. I do. You do. Trump does. Obama does. Christians do. Athiests do. Everyone does. Everyone commits racist actions and has racist thoughts, but it doesn't make them racists, it just makes them human. I have only met 3 or 4 genuine bonafide racists in my entire life. But I have met thousands of humans who sometimes do or say racist things.
Does black culture perpetuate racism? Why is that question never asked? Quite frankly if we stop putting people into "buckets" and see them as individuals it would redress a lot of concerns we all have as a country.
I am a practicing Catholic and attend Mass every Sunday. At my last parish our choir director of 20 years was black and a gay man who lived with his partner. He was very active in our parish life. In fact many parents trusted their children to be alone in his care (we had a large children's choir) during choir practice more than some of the priests at catechism. He was a wonderful human being and christian. Three thousand attended his memorial service as he was greatly loved by all. We did not see black or gay. We saw a christian who lived his life as we all should: loving others as he wanted to be loved and we all did. I still mss him and I am sure he is in heaven.
-
Every example is different. Pretty sure you can't tell your boss or teacher to F off.
You can definitely tell a professor to unnatural carnal knowledge off. I have. A boss on the other hand...
-
So you as long as you don't "persistently or pervasively" harass or abuse someone, no problem? That's quite a loophole -- one that's not mentioned in the quoted text, I should add.
You should have said you work in student conduct up front, as I respect the expertise. That being said, it's a shame you (and departments) don't think and wouldn't prosecute this as a code of conduct violation. If you can say "go f*ck yourself" to the University President, in public no less, and not be disciplined for that, that code of conduct is just a bunch of fluff.
Speech is a tough question. Where do you draw the line? If someone tells a student "hey, nice a$$" should the school punish them for that? Some would call that a compliment, others harassment. What about the student in the McAdams case? He said something that some would deem hateful. Should the university have punished him? What if the student didn't say "F*ck you" to Lovell but instead to some celebrity or politician on twitter? Should the university punish them?
And its not the student code of conduct that is fluff...its the first amendment. Marquette guarantees first amendment rights to its students and the courts have decided that only very limited kinds of speech can be regulated.
Every example is different. Pretty sure you can't tell your boss or teacher to F off.
Actually you can tell your boss to go eff off. And there is nothing the US governement can do about it. Now your private business can do something about it, but legally you are fine.
Same thing with teachers, but with some wrinkles. There are different rules with minors. In college, you can tell your teacher to eff off but it depends on the context. If you do it during class then you can get in trouble because you are disrupting the academic environment of the classroom. Essentially, because your speech is keeping other students from learning it can be regulated. But if you are meeting with the teacher after class or in their office, you can tell them to eff off all you want.
Communication law is fascinating and a very tough subject. The reality is that in most cases, the court of public opinion is going to be able to regulate it a lot better than any legal court.
-
Does black culture perpetuate racism? Why is that question never asked? Quite frankly if we stop putting people into "buckets" and see them as individuals it would redress a lot of concerns we all have as a country.
No, black culture as a whole does not perpetuate racism. At least not in our country. There might be small pieces that do but throughout American History black people have disproportionately been the target of oppression while white people have been the enablers of it. And the question gets asked all the time.
I am a practicing Catholic and attend Mass every Sunday. At my last parish our choir director of 20 years was black and a gay man who lived with his partner. He was very active in our parish life. In fact many parents trusted their children to be alone in his care (we had a large children's choir) during choir practice more than some of the priests at catechism. He was a wonderful human being and christian. Three thousand attended his memorial service as he was greatly loved by all. We did not see black or gay. We saw a christian who lived his life as we all should: loving others as he wanted to be loved and we all did. I still mss him and I am sure he is in heaven.
That is a wonderful story. But the reality is that your friend was not just a wonderful human being and christian. He was a wonderful human being and christian who was also black and gay. Because of those two identities, he likely had to overcome more barriers and challenges to become a good christian that his white and straight brothers and sisters did not have to overcome. Why would you ignore that part of his heritage and culture? Those identities were part of who he was as a person, don't take those away. I attend service with several men and women who identify as LGBTQ. We've had extensive conversations about how difficult it is for them to have faith when many who share the faith, including leadership in the church, have told them that they are abominations who will burn in hell. If someone told me that, I would never follow their religion. But these men and women have such strong faith that they overcome that and still follow the way. That is a level of dedication and faith that deserves to be recognized.
-
Quite frankly if we stop putting people into "buckets" and see them as individuals it would redress a lot of concerns we all have as a country.
Kanye approves of this message.
-
This isn't what the sign is saying. There is a difference between being white and white culture. Being white doesn't perpetuate racism but participating in white culture does.
Here's the problem as I see it with this construction and why I think the message gets lost (as it's absolutely the right message to send). This isn't about racism(overt or conscious decision to impact people or people(s) based on the color of their skin) but a bias problem(subconcious decision making based on incomplete or inaccurate information). Human's individually and as monolithic culture structures (white, black, brown, tall, short, skinny, fat, educated, uneducated, etc)....have to make decisions/statements/take action on incomplete information. When the individual/culture runs into another individual/culture with a different or more complete information set these bias could result in conflict. The key is finding a way to rationalizing the information set of the two individuals/cultures without creating conflict. One group needs to realize the might cause offense while the other group needs to realize that the other party may have offended through no fault of their own. Making statements like the above(a culture is naturally racist, the term racism fair or not is to charged to be effective anymore) escalates the conflict not the reverse.
Basically, this boils down to a practical application of Hanlon's Razor "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". It's relatively flippant but the point remains, if we assume the best from an intent standpoint and that it is an ignorance issue both sides can come together to resolve.
A very simple case in point, in my younger years I use to use the phrase "let's call a spade a spade" as short hand for let's be clear about the topic. However, I had a co-worker point out to me that sometimes spade was used as a slur and that some believe the phrase to be insensitive because of that confusion, so I excised the phrase from my lexicon. Was I being offensive by using the phrase? Not intentionally nor do I regret the use as it never even cross my mind as was not used in an offensive manner, but I know better now so I avoid it to be sensitive to those who might be offended by it.
It's no doubt a very difficult topic, but I think the sooner we move from the monolithic approach to bias and any -isms and move to view where it's an "information problem" we'll be better off. It won't solve actual racism but it should draw a much more bright circle around actual racism
-
This isn't what the sign is saying. There is a difference between being white and white culture. Being white doesn't perpetuate racism but participating in white culture does.
You essentially have two choices on what to do with white privilege. You can ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist, which perpetuates racism. Or you can acknowledge it and try to use it to help your fellow man which fights racism. I would imagine that is this what this event is meant to be about. Though I could be wrong. Students sometimes do dumb things despite good intentions.
I think a big barrier here is the use of the "R word." Some people are so uncomfortable with being associated with racism that it immediately shuts down any conversation. Everyone does racist things every day. I do. You do. Trump does. Obama does. Christians do. Athiests do. Everyone does. Everyone commits racist actions and has racist thoughts, but it doesn't make them racists, it just makes them human. I have only met 3 or 4 genuine bonafide racists in my entire life. But I have met thousands of humans who sometimes do or say racist things.
The whole concept of "white culture" is a joke and idiotic. You cannot lump together every white culture together when 90% of them hated each other through all of time.
-
The whole concept of "white culture" is a joke and idiotic. You cannot lump together every white culture together when 90% of them hated each other through all of time.
Your mixing up race and ethnicity. White culture refers to white skinned people as a race. What you are thinking of is ethnicity.
-
Your mixing up race and ethnicity. White culture refers to white skinned people as a race. What you are thinking of is ethnicity.
I think the point he's making, and it's probably a reasonable one, is that there is quite a bit of variety among the cultures mashed together as "white" culture. for example, lumping Spanish traditions together with Ukranian traditions as some sort of monolithic "White" culture makes about as much sense as lumping together Japanese and Kazak traditions as "Asian culture."
Rather, I think when one refers to "white culture" in the context, what they're really referring to is the predominant "American" culture, which historically hasn't always been kind, just and fair to its minority elements.
-
Here's the problem as I see it with this construction and why I think the message gets lost (as it's absolutely the right message to send). This isn't about racism(overt or conscious decision to impact people or people(s) based on the color of their skin) but a bias problem(subconcious decision making based on incomplete or inaccurate information). Human's individually and as monolithic culture structures (white, black, brown, tall, short, skinny, fat, educated, uneducated, etc)....have to make decisions/statements/take action on incomplete information. When the individual/culture runs into another individual/culture with a different or more complete information set these bias could result in conflict. The key is finding a way to rationalizing the information set of the two individuals/cultures without creating conflict. One group needs to realize the might cause offense while the other group needs to realize that the other party may have offended through no fault of their own. Making statements like the above(a culture is naturally racist, the term racism fair or not is to charged to be effective anymore) escalates the conflict not the reverse.
Basically, this boils down to a practical application of Hanlon's Razor "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". It's relatively flippant but the point remains, if we assume the best from an intent standpoint and that it is an ignorance issue both sides can come together to resolve.
A very simple case in point, in my younger years I use to use the phrase "let's call a spade a spade" as short hand for let's be clear about the topic. However, I had a co-worker point out to me that sometimes spade was used as a slur and that some believe the phrase to be insensitive because of that confusion, so I excised the phrase from my lexicon. Was I being offensive by using the phrase? Not intentionally nor do I regret the use as it never even cross my mind as was not used in an offensive manner, but I know better now so I avoid it to be sensitive to those who might be offended by it.
It's no doubt a very difficult topic, but I think the sooner we move from the monolithic approach to bias and any -isms and move to view where it's an "information problem" we'll be better off. It won't solve actual racism but it should draw a much more bright circle around actual racism
A lot of good points in here and brings up a question I have often asked. Do we stop using the word racism because it makes people uncomfortable and start using something like bias? Or does that minimize the impact of these actions? A tough question for sure.
-
I think the point he's making, and it's probably a reasonable one, is that there is quite a bit of variety among the cultures mashed together as "white" culture. for example, lumping Spanish traditions together with Ukranian traditions as some sort of monolithic "White" culture makes about as much sense as lumping together Japanese and Kazak traditions as "Asian culture."
Rather, I think when one refers to "white culture" in the context, what they're really referring to is the predominant "American" culture, which historically hasn't always been kind, just and fair to its minority elements.
Not exactly. White culture refers to privileges, experiences, histories, etc. of people who are white skinned as a group. Because whether you are Italian white, Irish white, German white, or American white, you receive the same privileges, advantages, and disadvantages that come with being white skinned. Just like whether or not you are Chinese, Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese, or Korean you receive the same privileges, advantages and disadvantages the come with appearing Asian. Or whether or not you are African, African American, Haitian, or Afro-French you receive the same privileges, advantages, and disadvantages that come with being black skinned.
Spanish and Ukrainian traditions are not questions of race but of ethnicity. White and black culture is about race.
-
Rather, I think when one refers to "white culture" in the context, what they're really referring to is the predominant "American" culture, which historically hasn't always been kind, just and fair to its minority elements.
Has there ever been a culture that was kind to its minority elements?
-
White and black culture is about race.
But what is white and black culture except for some nebulous (at best) concept created for the sake of a label?
Culture is something definable. You can point to a tradition or characteristic and say "That's Irish" or "That's Brazilian."
What are the defining characteristics of white culture? Or black culture?
-
Has there ever been a culture that was kind to its minority elements?
Pretty much no. "Middleman minorities" have historical suffered the most atrocities.
Black Rednecks and White Liberals by Thomas Sowell is a fascinating read in this topic.
-
Has there ever been a culture that was kind to its minority elements?
Actually, the Romans were quite decent to its conquered minorities so long as they didn't do anything silly like rebel.
-
Not exactly. White culture refers to privileges, experiences, histories, etc. of people who are white skinned as a group. Because whether you are Italian white, Irish white, German white, or American white, you receive the same privileges, advantages, and disadvantages that come with being white skinned. Just like whether or not you are Chinese, Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese, or Korean you receive the same privileges, advantages and disadvantages the come with appearing Asian. Or whether or not you are African, African American, Haitian, or Afro-French you receive the same privileges, advantages, and disadvantages that come with being black skinned.
Spanish and Ukrainian traditions are not questions of race but of ethnicity. White and black culture is about race.
I don't think you're realizing how much ethnicity impacts culture. I understand that you can say white culture to group then all together but I think that's a BS way to group everybody together.
I know Italian people darker than certain African Americans do which should be lumped where. As far as histories, I know at three three of those ethnicities listed were treated as a step below "real whites" for years. How can you lump all these people together and say "white culture"
I'm not arguing against black culture here, white Americans stripped their actual culture from them and they developed one where ethnicity isn't as impactful.
-
Not exactly. White culture refers to privileges, experiences, histories, etc. of people who are white skinned as a group. Because whether you are Italian white, Irish white, German white, or American white, you receive the same privileges, advantages, and disadvantages that come with being white skinned. Just like whether or not you are Chinese, Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese, or Korean you receive the same privileges, advantages and disadvantages the come with appearing Asian. Or whether or not you are African, African American, Haitian, or Afro-French you receive the same privileges, advantages, and disadvantages that come with being black skinned.
Spanish and Ukrainian traditions are not questions of race but of ethnicity. White and black culture is about race.
The problem with the grouping is that it is too broad and too easily obfuscate as "that's not my culture" or "I'm not that". The monolithic approach will fail, it's just too easy to avoid being part of the problem on the individual level.
-
Actually, the Romans were quite decent to its conquered minorities so long as they didn't do anything silly like rebel.
In many ways they were decent yes, but they also stole (conscripted???) children from people in these civilizations and put them to work in the Legions (as one example). Not really something that would go over well nowadays.
What they did well was allow cultures and religions to remain in place.
-
A lot of good points in here and brings up a question I have often asked. Do we stop using the word racism because it makes people uncomfortable and start using something like bias? Or does that minimize the impact of these actions? A tough question for sure.
Put me in the camp of saying the less aggressive to make the discussion the topic the better, which is why I articulate it as an information problem. If the "sides" in an issue have different information and it's about education one side or both then it's much easier for the people involved to accept because they aren't reacting to being bad people they are reacting to information.
-
What they did well was allow cultures and religions to remain in place.
Not really, they just took the long con. Case in point, the number of Christian celebrations which are repurposed from pagan rituals. It's societal erosion theory: The idea being that their culture will become absorbed into my culture simply from repeated exposure (time and pressure shapes the cultural world just as well as the physical world).
-
Not really, they just took the long con. Case in point, the number of Christian celebrations which are repurposed from pagan rituals. It's societal erosion theory: The idea being that their culture will become absorbed into my culture simply from repeated exposure (time and pressure shapes the cultural world just as well as the physical world).
I am a little unclear on what you mean, but I get most of you point (I think). The Christians may be a great example of how many minority groups were treated in the Roman Empire.
But contrary to that, Judaism and Islam were both in many ways, unchanged, during Roman rule (obviously one big change in Judaism, but that wasn't really the result of the Romans).
Either way, the point is, in every society there will be those that are who are at the bottom. If people can move their station up by getting others to fear/hate/misunderstand those that are different, well, history tells us that most people will take that opportunity to make themselves feel (and appear) better at the expense of others.
-
No, black culture as a whole does not perpetuate racism. At least not in our country. There might be small pieces that do but throughout American History black people have disproportionately been the target of oppression while white people have been the enablers of it. And the question gets asked all the time.
That is a wonderful story. But the reality is that your friend was not just a wonderful human being and christian. He was a wonderful human being and christian who was also black and gay. Because of those two identities, he likely had to overcome more barriers and challenges to become a good christian that his white and straight brothers and sisters did not have to overcome. Why would you ignore that part of his heritage and culture? Those identities were part of who he was as a person, don't take those away. I attend service with several men and women who identify as LGBTQ. We've had extensive conversations about how difficult it is for them to have faith when many who share the faith, including leadership in the church, have told them that they are abominations who will burn in hell. If someone told me that, I would never follow their religion. But these men and women have such strong faith that they overcome that and still follow the way. That is a level of dedication and faith that deserves to be recognized.
I guess that is where your experience and my experience differ. Donival never felt different as a black/gay man in our parish or even the Methodist congregation where he was the musical director before he came to our parish; nor did we ignore his heritage either. In fact we celebrated it as he brought his Baptist and African American music traditions to our worship services and Sunday Mass. Donival also loved the latin and liturgical traditions of the Catholic Church. Our Church choir (some 60 strong) together with the Delaware Gay Mens Choir (his partner was a member) performed at the Trenton War Memorial with the Trenton Symphony Orchestra for a Veteran's Day Concert. We truly appreciated and loved him for not what he was but for who he was and the feeling was mutual. I wish we could get past group think and see people for who they are and how they can make a mark and touch ones life.
-
In many ways they were decent yes, but they also stole (conscripted???) children from people in these civilizations and put them to work in the Legions (as one example). Not really something that would go over well nowadays.
What they did well was allow cultures and religions to remain in place.
I don't think "stole" is a fair description. Young men of a certain age were expected to serve in the military. It's really no different than the compulsory military service in many countries today.
-
Hmmm, I believe that many young boys were taken from other groups after the Romans defeated them as a way to make certain the parents wouldn't cause too much trouble. These hostages were trained and educated as Romans, in part to make the leaders of these cultures more Roman when they were sent back. After spending their childhood in Rome learning and training they were then put into the military. After their Military service some were sent back to rule their past culture, though they had been thoroughly Romanized.
Not quite the same as mandatory military service in Israel, Switzerland or wherever else.
This did come back to bite the Romans in the butt in one of their worst defeats ever though. Kind of a neat historical story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest
Now clearly this is one situation, and the one that I remembered so maybe not all cultures were treated in this manner after Roman subjugation, but I would have a hard time thinking this was a Arminius was a one off situation.
-
I am a little unclear on what you mean, but I get most of you point (I think). The Christians may be a great example of how many minority groups were treated in the Roman Empire.
But contrary to that, Judaism and Islam were both in many ways, unchanged, during Roman rule (obviously one big change in Judaism, but that wasn't really the result of the Romans).
Either way, the point is, in every society there will be those that are who are at the bottom. If people can move their station up by getting others to fear/hate/misunderstand those that are different, well, history tells us that most people will take that opportunity to make themselves feel (and appear) better at the expense of others.
Let me put it a different way, not all suppression of minority cultures were by force but the suppression was no less real. Once the Roman empire converted to Christianity it suppressed by limiting access to "government services" unless you were a member of the faith, they made Christianity attractive by grafting Christian concepts onto pagan concepts. The Roman empire did the same thing with Greek theology, Zeus and Jupiter are the same god with Jupiter as the Roman version to ensure transition from one model to another without force being required.
Like I said, my main point is all dominate states/culture have suppressed minority ones, often by violence, but some times by economics, assimilation, etc.
-
Let me put it a different way, not all suppression of minority cultures were by force but the suppression was no less real. Once the Roman empire converted to Christianity it suppressed by limiting access to "government services" unless you were a member of the faith, they made Christianity attractive by grafting Christian concepts onto pagan concepts. The Roman empire did the same thing with Greek theology, Zeus and Jupiter are the same god with Jupiter as the Roman version to ensure transition from one model to another without force being required.
Like I said, my main point is all dominate states/culture have suppressed minority ones, often by violence, but some times by economics, assimilation, etc.
(https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/54253133.jpg)
-
I guess that is where your experience and my experience differ. Donival never felt different as a black/gay man in our parish or even the Methodist congregation where he was the musical director before he came to our parish; nor did we ignore his heritage either. In fact we celebrated it as he brought his Baptist and African American music traditions to our worship services and Sunday Mass. Donival also loved the latin and liturgical traditions of the Catholic Church. Our Church choir (some 60 strong) together with the Delaware Gay Mens Choir (his partner was a member) performed at the Trenton War Memorial with the Trenton Symphony Orchestra for a Veteran's Day Concert. We truly appreciated and loved him for not what he was but for who he was and the feeling was mutual. I wish we could get past group think and see people for who they are and how they can make a mark and touch ones life.
Why are you limiting his experience only within the context of your church? The guy lead a life outside of the church where he undoubtedly experienced biases all the time.
And as for your last sentence, I agree completely. But ignoring that biases exist and addressing them is not going to make that happen.
-
This. Even the pretty quote is "live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin" - not "live in a nation that declines to acknowledge the color of their skin." I think we had another related conversation of this in another (probably rightfully locked) thread, but while I have a lot of sympathy/empathy for everyone that was raised to be "colorblind" that doesn't mean it works. Aiming to be colorblind is a skin deep (pun intended) solution to a much deeper problem. It turns "racism" into something that we all try to prove we aren't, but blinds us to the institutional disadvantages of the system that we reinforce everyday... while simultaneously and dissonantly trying to prove we aren't interpersonally racist.
This is very well said. Thanks.
-
Why no outrage about privilege and cultural appropriation accusations with the outfits at the Met Gala last night?
"Them Catholics, let's dress up like they do. No one will care. I call the slutty pope."
-
Why no outrage about privilege and cultural appropriation accusations with the outfits at the Met Gala last night?
"Them Catholics, let's dress up like they do. No one will care. I call the slutty pope."
1. There's plenty of outrage.
2. Which only serves to prove that it's not just the "libtards" and "SJWs" in a great big hurry to claim victim status.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/catholics-slam-met-galas-religious-inspired-outfits-blasphemous-103159024.html
-
1. There's plenty of outrage.
2. Which only serves to prove that it's not just the "libtards" and "SJWs" in a great big hurry to claim victim status.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/catholics-slam-met-galas-religious-inspired-outfits-blasphemous-103159024.html
We live in the era of outrage culture regardless of political/social affiliation. It's kind of amazing.
-
Lenny Bruce said "fook you" is a good thin' and I hoe hardily agree wit 'im. Next time y'all wanna greet yo friends or kin properly, insted of sayin' "yo" orr "hi," tell 'em, "fook you," aina?
-
A topic that some may have missed but seems very relevant given the conversation is the Halsey/hotel shampoo online dust-up from a few weeks ago.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/04/30/singer-halsey-stirs-debate-over-hotels-offering-only-white-people-shampoo/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6f4ec3581bec (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/04/30/singer-halsey-stirs-debate-over-hotels-offering-only-white-people-shampoo/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6f4ec3581bec)
This is a perfect illustration of how the institutionalization of racism is and how difficult it is to have a rational conversation about it. Are hotels racist for not providing shampoo, probably not overtly but I'd be really shocked if they thought about differing hair types either and what shampoo works for those styles. Intended or not, some might feel they are excluded because of an oversight like this. Most of us scoff at the thought of a shampoo controversy, but it's a great example of where there is a mismatch in information/experience amongst groups of people that could be avoided with thoughtful discussion.
I'm hopeful that we are moving to a time where we can have thoughtful/rational discussions without making everything a disaster or reason for boycott/protest/counterprotest. Let's keep our outrage powder dry for when it really matters.
-
Don't understand y wee kant all look alike, like a world of Waldos. Sure wood get ridda lots of hatred, hey?
-
Don't understand y wee kant all look alike, like a world of Waldos. Sure wood get ridda lots of hatred, hey?
Sexbots will solve that, hey?
-
Interesting perspective....
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/07/21/politics/charlamagne-tha-god-black-privilege/index.html
-
A topic that some may have missed but seems very relevant given the conversation is the Halsey/hotel shampoo online dust-up from a few weeks ago.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/04/30/singer-halsey-stirs-debate-over-hotels-offering-only-white-people-shampoo/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6f4ec3581bec (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/04/30/singer-halsey-stirs-debate-over-hotels-offering-only-white-people-shampoo/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6f4ec3581bec)
This is a perfect illustration of how the institutionalization of racism is and how difficult it is to have a rational conversation about it. Are hotels racist for not providing shampoo, probably not overtly but I'd be really shocked if they thought about differing hair types either and what shampoo works for those styles. Intended or not, some might feel they are excluded because of an oversight like this. Most of us scoff at the thought of a shampoo controversy, but it's a great example of where there is a mismatch in information/experience amongst groups of people that could be avoided with thoughtful discussion.
I'm hopeful that we are moving to a time where we can have thoughtful/rational discussions without making everything a disaster or reason for boycott/protest/counterprotest. Let's keep our outrage powder dry for when it really matters.
i never knew there was such a thing as "white people shampoo". well, i'm goin a little thin on top-any cue-ball shine? this could go on and on...food offerings, etc etc...at a time when we need to bring people together, many want to divide and separate.
from a business perspective, this could get out of hand. if the hotel one is staying at doesn't offer what one feels is a necessity, try another place that will cater to you. we can't mandate these places have all the things for all people. one thing i will not do is complain about the food at a restaurant. i really don't want the thoughts of spit or any other bodily fluids going thru my head as i'm eating my "cheeseburger" if ya know what i mean. vote with your wallet
-
i never knew there was such a thing as "white people shampoo". well, i'm goin a little thin on top-any cue-ball shine? this could go on and on...food offerings, etc etc...at a time when we need to bring people together, many want to divide and separate.
from a business perspective, this could get out of hand. if the hotel one is staying at doesn't offer what one feels is a necessity, try another place that will cater to you. we can't mandate these places have all the things for all people. one thing i will not do is complain about the food at a restaurant. i really don't want the thoughts of spit or any other bodily fluids going thru my head as i'm eating my "cheeseburger" if ya know what i mean. vote with your wallet
I'm afraid you're missing the point. This isn't about dividing people or mandating anything. Rather, it's just another item on what I imagine is a long list of daily reminders to minorities that they are viewed as "others" by many of our institutions. Nobody's claiming racism or discrimination or demanding anything. Just pointing out how they receive different accommodations.
-
I'm afraid you're missing the point. This isn't about dividing people or mandating anything. Rather, it's just another item on what I imagine is a long list of daily reminders to minorities that they are viewed as "others" by many of our institutions. Nobody's claiming racism or discrimination or demanding anything. Just pointing out how they receive different accommodations.
that is one way to look at it and you aren't wrong, but...code words-"white" that is divisive.
i don't think i am missing any points
mandate? well that all depends
how about minorities assimilate and acclimate. if a certain business does not meet their needs-don't spend your money there
i'm just pointing out how it is perceived by some when they claim they aren't getting the accommodations they need
-
I'm afraid you're missing the point. This isn't about dividing people or mandating anything. Rather, it's just another item on what I imagine is a long list of daily reminders to minorities that they are viewed as "others" by many of our institutions. Nobody's claiming racism or discrimination or demanding anything. Just pointing out how they receive different accommodations.
Correct, it's really about the fact that people don't think about it rather than they did something intentional. Not as divisive but something I've personally noticed and annoys me to the point that I will actually say something.....when I go some place with male and female bathrooms and only the female bathroom has a changing table for a kid. Whether they've thought about it or not, that business is baking into the pie the concept that only women would change a diaper. I don't think the businesses are intentionally saying women should be the caregivers for kids but they are also not thinking it and it reinforces a behavior that we don't necessarily want to reinforce.
-
that is one way to look at it and you aren't wrong, but...code words-"white" that is divisive.
i don't think i am missing any points
mandate? well that all depends
how about minorities assimilate and acclimate. if a certain business does not meet their needs-don't spend your money there
i'm just pointing out how it is perceived by some when they claim they aren't getting the accommodations they need
You are missing the point. Halsey and others aren't necessarily demanding accommodations and I'm fairly certain those with specific hair needs and/or are on the road for long periods of time have assimilated by bringing their own products (I know my wife does where as I never do). However, it is a great example of where the absence of thought or empathy with someone else's experience can lead to that person/group feeling ostracized.
And the tyranny of the majority (hey minority group, just assimilate) doesn't lend itself well to harmonious experiences when the groups interact.
-
how about minorities assimilate and acclimate.
Assimilate and accliimate the genes that produce their hair? So, voluntary eugenics?
-
Yes. The racial group that was originally brought over as slaves should assimilate and acclimate instead of pointing out the everyday biases that they have to live with.
I mean, how rude.
-
i never knew there was such a thing as "white people shampoo".
There is. Black hair is very different from white hair at a biological level. They require different kinds of shampoos in order to maintain. The shampoos provided by most major hotel chains (if not all) would not work black hair. I'm not an expert in this topic but I believe white shampoo could even be damaging to black hair.
I don't think anyone is demanding that all hotels be mandated to carry different kinds of shampoo. Its merely pointing out one of the thousands small every day things that cater to white people and not to people of color.
-
There is. Black hair is very different from white hair at a biological level. They require different kinds of shampoos in order to maintain. The shampoos provided by most major hotel chains (if not all) would not work black hair. I'm not an expert in this topic but I believe white shampoo could even be damaging to black hair.
I don't think anyone is demanding that all hotels be mandated to carry different kinds of shampoo. Its merely pointing out one of the thousands small every day things that cater to white people and not to people of color.
One note, and not picking on you, just the way you wrote it made me think of it. Really this is a "genetic issue" that predominately impacts black hair(there are some white people that would have the same issue but it's much rarer). There are plenty of ethnicites that have this issue, a lot of them are minority, hence your point of how the system caters to the white majority subconsciously.
-
One note, and not picking on you, just the way you wrote it made me think of it. Really this is a "genetic issue" that predominately impacts black hair(there are some white people that would have the same issue but it's much rarer). There are plenty of ethnicites that have this issue, a lot of them are minority, hence your point of how the system caters to the white majority subconsciously.
I appreciate the correction. Like I said I am not an expert in the topic by any means. I just know what I have been told anecdotally by others.
-
Late to the thread, but I didn't see any discussion about something that jumped out at me.
First, I'll say I am white, and agree that white privilege is a "thing." That open dialogue is a great step toward leveling the playing field. That minorities shouldn't be told to "just assimilate and deal with it." That the concept of "being colorblind" might work on a micro level, but we aren't anywhere close on a macro level. And that it's everybody's responsibility to work toward change.
But the comment from the VP of Student Affairs about creating "more safe spaces?" How does setting up separate areas for people to segregate themselves help to solve the problem? Seems to me it would do the opposite. We need to work together to solve the problem, not further isolate ourselves into silos and hope that "the other side" fixes it.
-
You are missing the point. Halsey and others aren't necessarily demanding accommodations and I'm fairly certain those with specific hair needs and/or are on the road for long periods of time have assimilated by bringing their own products (I know my wife does where as I never do). However, it is a great example of where the absence of thought or empathy with someone else's experience can lead to that person/group feeling ostracized.
And the tyranny of the majority (hey minority group, just assimilate) doesn't lend itself well to harmonious experiences when the groups interact.
I saw brain surgeon's remarks in your post and can't say that I am surprised by him saying it is up to minorities to "become more white" or "acclimated" to sound more PC.
I agree with your posts completely. I don't think it is any racist attempt by hotels with their choice of shampoos. Simply catering to the vast majority of customers. Hopefully, and I don't know the answer to this, at least the better hotels have other shampoos that minorities can request.
-
But the comment from the VP of Student Affairs about creating "more safe spaces?" How does setting up separate areas for people to segregate themselves help to solve the problem? Seems to me it would do the opposite. We need to work together to solve the problem, not further isolate ourselves into silos and hope that "the other side" fixes it.
Don't want one of these right on the bridge in the library?
https://twitter.com/aJackieLarsen/status/988820882717003776/photo/1
i never knew there was such a thing as "white people shampoo". well, i'm goin a little thin on top-any cue-ball shine? this could go on and on...food offerings, etc etc...at a time when we need to bring people together, many want to divide and separate.
The free market is a beautiful thing. They would make changes if there was an unmet need, but no one of any race really gives a damn about hotel shampoo.
Contrast that to what Uber did in the outer boroughs of New York, where in many neighborhoods a yellow cab was a myth since taxis wouldn't venture into many neighborhoods with high minority populations, and there were instances of drivers driving right by people of color. By individualizing riders and through the app-based payment method, they've fought discrimination and have had the cabbies crying for years now.
-
The free market is a beautiful thing.
As are most fantasies and myths.
-
But the comment from the VP of Student Affairs about creating "more safe spaces?" How does setting up separate areas for people to segregate themselves help to solve the problem? Seems to me it would do the opposite. We need to work together to solve the problem, not further isolate ourselves into silos and hope that "the other side" fixes it.
Safe space is an often misunderstood term. Safe space refers to a meeting, group, office, event, etc where people from different backgrounds can come together to discuss difficult topics without fear of being personally attacked or retaliated against for their opinions/beliefs. The idea behind them is that people from "both sides" can come together to have dialogue and make progress towards a common understanding.
Unfortunately, people on the extremes of both sides have corrupted the term with people on the left sometimes using it as a weapon to shut people down and people on the right making it out to be kumbaya orgy circles where no dissenting opinions are allowed. Some people have tried rebranding them to "brave spaces" or "challenge spaces" and some other terms but none have caught on.
IMHO, the VPSA made a mistake by using the term since it is so often misunderstood and is often a lightening rod for criticism. Something like "opportunities for dialogue" or something would have been better. The word choice wasn't the best but the idea is sound.
-
Speech is a tough question. Where do you draw the line? If someone tells a student "hey, nice a$$" should the school punish them for that? Some would call that a compliment, others harassment. What about the student in the McAdams case? He said something that some would deem hateful. Should the university have punished him? What if the student didn't say "F*ck you" to Lovell but instead to some celebrity or politician on twitter? Should the university punish them?
And its not the student code of conduct that is fluff...its the first amendment. Marquette guarantees first amendment rights to its students and the courts have decided that only very limited kinds of speech can be regulated.
Actually you can tell your boss to go eff off. And there is nothing the US governement can do about it. Now your private business can do something about it, but legally you are fine.
Same thing with teachers, but with some wrinkles. There are different rules with minors. In college, you can tell your teacher to eff off but it depends on the context. If you do it during class then you can get in trouble because you are disrupting the academic environment of the classroom. Essentially, because your speech is keeping other students from learning it can be regulated. But if you are meeting with the teacher after class or in their office, you can tell them to eff off all you want.
Communication law is fascinating and a very tough subject. The reality is that in most cases, the court of public opinion is going to be able to regulate it a lot better than any legal court.
TAMU, if you are interested in some of this stuff, I cannot recommend the So to Speak podcast enough.
It's a really well done podcast done by FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) and they cover lots of fantastic topics that are tough conversations to have and the importance of understanding free speech.
The funny thing is, I started listening to this as a guy I went to high school with is the one who hosts the show and I figured I'd check it out. But I've been surprised with how much I've enjoyed it.
-
Late to the thread, but I didn't see any discussion about something that jumped out at me.
First, I'll say I am white, and agree that white privilege is a "thing." That open dialogue is a great step toward leveling the playing field. That minorities shouldn't be told to "just assimilate and deal with it." That the concept of "being colorblind" might work on a micro level, but we aren't anywhere close on a macro level. And that it's everybody's responsibility to work toward change.
But the comment from the VP of Student Affairs about creating "more safe spaces?" How does setting up separate areas for people to segregate themselves help to solve the problem? Seems to me it would do the opposite. We need to work together to solve the problem, not further isolate ourselves into silos and hope that "the other side" fixes it.
That is what we are having here, an open discussion. I agree and Marquette having "safe spaces" and a one-sided meeting is not going to bring folks together. In fact it will only further divide and alienate students who genuinely have a different voice and silence them for fear of being called racists.
-
That is what we are having here, an open discussion. I agree and Marquette having "safe spaces" and a one-sided meeting is not going to bring folks together. In fact it will only further divide and alienate students who genuinely have a different voice and silence them for fear of being called racists.
See above post about safe spaces.
And you are assuming that this is a "one sided meeting." You have alienated folks before the meeting even started!
-
Safe space is an often misunderstood term. Safe space refers to a meeting, group, office, event, etc where people from different backgrounds can come together to discuss difficult topics without fear of being personally attacked or retaliated against for their opinions/beliefs. The idea behind them is that people from "both sides" can come together to have dialogue and make progress towards a common understanding.
Unfortunately, people on the extremes of both sides have corrupted the term with people on the left sometimes using it as a weapon to shut people down and people on the right making it out to be kumbaya orgy circles where no dissenting opinions are allowed. Some people have tried rebranding them to "brave spaces" or "challenge spaces" and some other terms but none have caught on.
IMHO, the VPSA made a mistake by using the term since it is so often misunderstood and is often a lightening rod for criticism. Something like "opportunities for dialogue" or something would have been better. The word choice wasn't the best but the idea is sound.
Interesting. That was most definitely NOT how they used the term when they had the well-publicized racial incidents at Mizzou a few years ago. My daughter was a student there at the time, and it was made very clear that the "safe spaces" they asked for would be off-limits to non-minorities.
Totally agree that the term should be abandoned.
-
2019 meme watch
kumbaya orgy circles
-
2019 meme watch
kumbaya orgy circles
Speaking of which, I highly recommend "Wild Wild Country" on Netflix.
-
"That minorities shouldn't be told to "just assimilate and deal with it."
i knew this one would be an easy target...all by itself. please don't twist and misinterpret and take my comment out of context. i used those 2 words in reference to our conversation regarding how ms halsey or whatever her name brought it up. something about "white persons shampoo or something. if the business doesn't offer you what you want or need, go somewhere else or open a business that is all inclusive. what i have trouble understanding is why anyone would go to a business demanding certain "wants" not needs, and then complain and protest and demand that one's "wants" are met. read certain bakeries
-
I saw brain surgeon's remarks in your post and can't say that I am surprised by him saying it is up to minorities to "become more white" or "acclimated" to sound more PC.
I agree with your posts completely. I don't think it is any racist attempt by hotels with their choice of shampoos. Simply catering to the vast majority of customers. Hopefully, and I don't know the answer to this, at least the better hotels have other shampoos that minorities can request.
come on jockstrap-you were frothing at the mouth to pounce on rocket the racist, right? pretty shallow and simplistic interpretation of what i said, but not really, considering the source.
-
theBabyDavid is a child of nature, friend of man
-
See above post about safe spaces.
And you are assuming that this is a "one sided meeting." You have alienated folks before the meeting even started!
The meeting took place on May 2, 2018.
The school’s Division of Student Affairs and Office of Mission and Ministry co-hosted a “Do Better Marquette” event at which a guest lecturer from the Young Women's Christian Association, Martha Barry, stated that students must recognize “white skin privilege.”
In an interview after the event, Barry explained to Campus Reform that “privilege to many people means monetary privilege,” and that the goal of the event was to make people aware that “there is a privilege that comes with being white skinned,” adding that
“We are biased in the direction of white skin color,” she elaborated. “So, even if you were talking to people of color...there’s ‘colorism’ that, like, the lightest-skinned one are the most acceptable ones.”
Of course I was not at the meeting so there may have been an opposing view, but there certainly was no guest lecturer to counter Ms. Barry's view. If the University were genuinely interested in creating a place where all view points would be respected and feel safe in presenting that view they should have at the very least had a guest lecturer present an alternative view so the two could at least debate the topic. From all appearances that did not happen.
-
I've always thought that most hotel shampoo sucks across the board, white hair or black hair. And WTF, shampoo but no conditioner? Who does that beside some greasy headed MFer?
Their lotion is worse. Towels suck too.
If you ain't staying at a high end joint, what do you expect?
Hell, PTM brings his own sheets to the hourly joint in Johnsburg.
-
I've always thought that most hotel shampoo sucks across the board, white hair or black hair. And WTF, shampoo but no conditioner? Who does that beside some greasy headed MFer?
Their lotion is worse. Towels suck too.
If you ain't staying at a high end joint, what do you expect?
Hell, PTM brings his own sheets to the hourly joint in Johnsburg.
That says it all. Crappy hotel shampoo is like a dry hump: All friction, no <cleaning> action.
Now, Double Tree cookies with a free drink ticket are another thing. That is privilege.
-
The meeting took place on May 2, 2018.
The school’s Division of Student Affairs and Office of Mission and Ministry co-hosted a “Do Better Marquette” event at which a guest lecturer from the Young Women's Christian Association, Martha Barry, stated that students must recognize “white skin privilege.”
In an interview after the event, Barry explained to Campus Reform that “privilege to many people means monetary privilege,” and that the goal of the event was to make people aware that “there is a privilege that comes with being white skinned,” adding that
“We are biased in the direction of white skin color,” she elaborated. “So, even if you were talking to people of color...there’s ‘colorism’ that, like, the lightest-skinned one are the most acceptable ones.”
Of course I was not at the meeting so there may have been an opposing view, but there certainly was no guest lecturer to counter Ms. Barry's view. If the University were genuinely interested in creating a place where all view points would be respected and feel safe in presenting that view they should have at the very least had a guest lecturer present an alternative view so the two could at least debate the topic. From all appearances that did not happen.
So every event every hosted at Marquette needs to have two speakers speaking from two different sides of an issue? How is that reasonable?
If someone speaks at Marquette about the importance of pro life, do they need to invite someone who is pro choice? If someone comes to campus to speak about evolution do they also need to invite a creationist? Should they also invite someone to lecture about the flying spaghetti monster?
Why can't students go to an event with one speaker and then ask tough questions and form their own opinions?
Or is it possible that you are just against the views of this particular speaker and want them shut down?
Students who don't agree with this speaker are free to go the event and challenge the speaker's point of view, or to not go in protest. They are also free to host a counter event and invite a speaker who will present an alternative point of view. The reality is though, there are no sides on this issue. White privilege exists, it is a fact. There may be disagreements on its impact, its importance, and what to do with it, but there is no denying its existence.
-
Crappy hotel shampoo is like a dry hump
That line was made at 12:11 a.m. So everybody else has nearly 24 hours to top it as the line of the day. I don't think it'll happen!
-
Dry hump? Dat kinda like Rosie Palm and her 5 friends with sand, hey?
-
So every event every hosted at Marquette needs to have two speakers speaking from two different sides of an issue? How is that reasonable?
If someone speaks at Marquette about the importance of pro life, do they need to invite someone who is pro choice? If someone comes to campus to speak about evolution do they also need to invite a creationist? Should they also invite someone to lecture about the flying spaghetti monster?
Why can't students go to an event with one speaker and then ask tough questions and form their own opinions?
Or is it possible that you are just against the views of this particular speaker and want them shut down?
Students who don't agree with this speaker are free to go the event and challenge the speaker's point of view, or to not go in protest. They are also free to host a counter event and invite a speaker who will present an alternative point of view. The reality is though, there are no sides on this issue. White privilege exists, it is a fact. There may be disagreements on its impact, its importance, and what to do with it, but there is no denying its existence.
That is your perception. I could argue that black privilege exists and I'm sure you will disagree. I thought the purpose of the meeting was to improve race relations and not to be lectured on how being white or whiteness or white culture perpetuates racism which from where I'm sitting only leads to further division.
-
That is your perception. I could argue that black privilege exists and I'm sure you will disagree. I thought the purpose of the meeting was to improve race relations and not to be lectured on how being white or whiteness or white culture perpetuates racism which from where I'm sitting only leads to further division.
How do you define "black privilege?"
-
That is your perception. I could argue that black privilege exists and I'm sure you will disagree. I thought the purpose of the meeting was to improve race relations and not to be lectured on how being white or whiteness or white culture perpetuates racism which from where I'm sitting only leads to further division.
Please tell us what black privilege is. I may agree with you but I probably don't call it that.
And again, I think you are making a lot of assumptions about what took place at this program. It's possible that it was a giant guilt trip trying to make white people feel guilty for being white, but knowing it was co-hosted by Campus Ministry I sincerely doubt that was the case. More likely it was a program about what white privilege is, the differences between white privilege and socio-economic privilege, and what students with privilege can do to help those without (or with less might be the more accurate statement).
-
How do you define "black privilege?"
All races, genders, cultures, etc have some form of privilege simply because privilege represents something(s) of "value" you get for being part of that monolithic thing simply because you are that thing.
(Not being flippant, serious point here) I'm tall, I get tall privilege in numerous ways: I can reach high things without assistance, society tends to associate height with leadership, a proclivity to be better at sports, etc. Nothing I did to earn that stuff and people who aren't tall can't gain those advantages.
Now the trick of this is adding up all of the monolithic privilege groups you are part of which grant benefits versus the groups you aren't part of which mean those benefits aren't available to you.....and you get a kind of math formula for how privileged you are through no work of your own simply because society is constructed the way it is.
So I'm white, cis-male, tall, native-born in the US, etc...those things have privileges that are baked into them currently that I have access to and/or don't have things to worry about as a result. A black, trans-woman, short, DACA, etc has privileges as a result of those identifiers but in net are considerably less than I would have.
-
I think the biggest problem I see with white privilege is that it causes white people to get defensive, like 69 is in this thread. Does white privilege exist? Absolutely, positively, and without any question. All you have to do is look at income disparity, conviction rates by race, and historic precedents like redlining and other Jim Crow laws that were once on the books and are still extant with or without enforcement.
Do I benefit from white privilege? Yes. Absolutely. It's not my fault, it's not my doing, it's not my creation, but it's something that is part of our society. It's baked in. The question isn't whether it's there, it's how we move forward to a better future where others are able to catch up. Similarly, how do we do the same for women? How do we do the same for the LBGTQ communities? How do we do the same for other races that are not given the same advantages that some of us enjoy often without even realizing it?
Having white privilege isn't a bad thing. Ignoring it, pretending it doesn't exist, or steadfastly refusing to engage the topic, that is a bad thing. That reinforces racist policies and practices in this country that predate even slavery. We've come this far because we as a society have had a willingness to engage these things in the past. But the idea that the existence of legislation is the same as the existence of equality is woefully mistaken.
-
I love this! Too funny.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwrOIl7hwQA&t=190s
-
Having white privilege isn't a bad thing. Ignoring it, pretending it doesn't exist, or steadfastly refusing to engage the topic, that is a bad thing. That reinforces racist policies and practices in this country that predate even slavery. We've come this far because we as a society have had a willingness to engage these things in the past. But the idea that the existence of legislation is the same as the existence of equality is woefully mistaken.
I think part of the problem is that the term "white privilege" is often used in a negative context, such as "of course you wouldn't understand, with your [sneer] white privilege and everything", as if being white is something that people choose.
-
I love this, some of you are killing me with your lefty talk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwrOIl7hwQA&t=190s
Above is an example of why we can't have good things. We're having a conversation or debate and somebody comes on using some idiotic source as if it's authoritative.
Dreadlocks: this one was taken too far. They're not historical to just African culture
Shampoo: if it doesn't make business sense to carry a African American friendly shampoo due to the clientele I hardly blame hotels for not doing it. That being said they should have that option. Just like airlines have gluten free or vegetarian options.
Her being half black: who the hell are you to decide who or what culture a person is. I have a friend who's a quarter Mexican quarter Native American and half Italian. She embraces her Native American roots and identifies with that side of her heritage. Who the hell are you to say "you don't look that way so you aren't" that's no different than the old 1/8 blood rule from slave and him crow days.
Her voice: if it's not your style don't listen. 90% of country stars got record deals because they fit a look and can sing with a fake southern accent but you don't see lefties railing on them for being phony or whatever.
-
I thought it was great! Sorry, you don't like it. ;)
-
I think part of the problem is that the term "white privilege" is often used in a negative context, such as "of course you wouldn't understand, with your [sneer] white privilege and everything", as if being white is something that people choose.
Yup. The marketing of the term has been terrible. Fixing white privilege requires the engagement of white people, and when you try to use the term to talk down to white people or infer that they are either perpetuating racism or deliberately racist, they are going to shut down and the conversation will be over.
We didn't choose to be white any more than anyone chooses to be black, brown, male, female, etc. If you're going to engage someone, you have to be able to reach them where they are with the mindset of where you want them to be. Anyone looking down their nose while saying "white privilege" is trying to engage based on history.
Just like contemporary white people are not personally responsible for slavery, they are not personally responsible for white privilege.
-
I think part of the problem is that the term "white privilege" is often used in a negative context, such as "of course you wouldn't understand, with your [sneer] white privilege and everything", as if being white is something that people choose.
Well, you're both right.
Having benefited my whole life from the privileges my skin color affords me, there are experiences/perspectives I can't understand in the same way a person of color experiences them. That's just a fact, and someone stating so ought not be a negative. If I take it as a negative, that's on me.
That said, of course using "white privilege" synonymously with "racism" is stupid and counterproductive.
-
Yup. The marketing of the term has been terrible. Fixing white privilege requires the engagement of white people, and when you try to use the term to talk down to white people or infer that they are either perpetuating racism or deliberately racist, they are going to shut down and the conversation will be over.
We didn't choose to be white any more than anyone chooses to be black, brown, male, female, etc. If you're going to engage someone, you have to be able to reach them where they are with the mindset of where you want them to be. Anyone looking down their nose while saying "white privilege" is trying to engage based on history.
Just like contemporary white people are not personally responsible for slavery, they are not personally responsible for white privilege.
Full throated agreement here. The one word I keep coming back to as I think about this topic is that all people, cultures, groups, etc need to be.....mindful. Just understand that anything we say or do or look like can have a different context for someone else and we need to be mindful of it. It doesn't mean anyone is bad or evil, just means we need to have awareness and being willing to engage to resolve any issues generated. Using things like white privilege as a spear actually perpetuates the privilege not fighting it.
Like it or not, if we are going to limit/eliminate the various privileges people who benefit from that privilege are going to have to be an ally in that effort and confronting them about it isn't a way to win allies.
-
That said, of course using "white privilege" synonymously with "racism" is stupid and counterproductive.
Agreed. Unfortunately, it often comes up during discussions of overtly racist incidents or situations, so it's easy to understand how many people would equate the two.
It's like the discussion TAMU and I had above about the concept of "safe spaces." If people mean places where open-minded people can come together and have a respectful discussion, then it's great. But I have also seen it used to describe places where white people aren't welcome.
-
Agreed. Unfortunately, it often comes up during discussions of overtly racist incidents or situations, so it's easy to understand how many people would equate the two.
It's like the discussion TAMU and I had above about the concept of "safe spaces." If people mean places where open-minded people can come together and have a respectful discussion, then it's great. But I have also seen it used to describe places where white people aren't welcome.
Yes you are correct. Safe spaces, as originally conceived, were literally places where people could go to be physically safe. Mostly LGBTQ in the wake of the Mathew Shepard incident in the late 90s.
-
Above is an example of why we can't have good things. We're having a conversation or debate and somebody comes on using some idiotic source as if it's authoritative.
Dreadlocks: this one was taken too far. They're not historical to just African culture
Shampoo: if it doesn't make business sense to carry a African American friendly shampoo due to the clientele I hardly blame hotels for not doing it. That being said they should have that option. Just like airlines have gluten free or vegetarian options.
Her being half black: who the hell are you to decide who or what culture a person is. I have a friend who's a quarter Mexican quarter Native American and half Italian. She embraces her Native American roots and identifies with that side of her heritage. Who the hell are you to say "you don't look that way so you aren't" that's no different than the old 1/8 blood rule from slave and him crow days.
Her voice: if it's not your style don't listen. 90% of country stars got record deals because they fit a look and can sing with a fake southern accent but you don't see lefties railing on them for being phony or whatever.
I agree with you, but tell that to Ms Barry who said this:
“We are biased in the direction of white skin color,” she elaborated. “So, even if you were talking to people of color...there’s ‘colorism’ that, like, the lightest-skinned ones are the most acceptable ones.”
Who the heck is she to speak for African Americans or anyone and say light skinned African Americans are the most acceptable ones. Perhaps she is revealing her own bias.
-
Who the heck is she
Who the heck are you?
See we can all do this.
-
Who the heck are you?
See we can all do this.
Yes we can and it certainly does not further the discussion on improving race relations which I thought was the purpose of that campus meeting.
-
Now, Double Tree cookies ... That is privilege.
What theBabyDavid wants to know is do you reach for the Double Fudge Chocolate Chip or the White Chocolate with Macadamia Nuts??
-
Yes we can and it certainly does not further the discussion on improving race relations which I thought was the purpose of that campus meeting.
If your point is that Marquette didn't handle the meeting 100% correctly, I would agree with you.
But that doesn't mean white privilege doesn't exist.
-
ESPN has a long story up today about Mike Tomlin that details in questions of race. Here's a particularly compelling segment, IMO.
Talk to white players who play for a black coach and they will tell you that the color of their coach’s skin does not matter. Of course it doesn’t matter, why should it matter? It doesn’t matter one bit. Talk to African-American players who play for a black coach and they will tell you that the color of their coach’s skin matters deeply, powerfully, necessarily and unavoidably. Of course it matters, it has to matter, it’d better matter, you’re damn right it matters, because it matters, just for starters, to them.
And this is the insoluble paradox at the heart of the racial conversation in the United States, circa 2018: that white America speaks of race as a consideration to be transcended, and black America speaks of race as a force to be acknowledged; that white America believes that the purpose of talking about race is to one day end the conversation, and black America believes that the purpose of talking about race is to one day get the real conversation started.
http://theundefeated.com/features/mike-tomlin-pittsburgh-steelers-in-search-of-the-real-coach/
-
I agree with you, but tell that to Ms Barry who said this:
“We are biased in the direction of white skin color,” she elaborated. “So, even if you were talking to people of color...there’s ‘colorism’ that, like, the lightest-skinned ones are the most acceptable ones.”
Who the heck is she to speak for African Americans or anyone and say light skinned African Americans are the most acceptable ones. Perhaps she is revealing her own bias.
Who are you to say that it isn't true? Spike Lee did an entire movie that had that subject as a major theme, School Daze.
-
Who are you to say that it isn't true? Spike Lee did an entire movie that had that subject as a major theme, School Daze.
Malcolm Gladwell also wrote about the concept being a part of Jamaican culture. I believe it was the last chapter in Outliers.
-
I agree with you, but tell that to Ms Barry who said this:
“We are biased in the direction of white skin color,” she elaborated. “So, even if you were talking to people of color...there’s ‘colorism’ that, like, the lightest-skinned ones are the most acceptable ones.”
Who the heck is she to speak for African Americans or anyone and say light skinned African Americans are the most acceptable ones. Perhaps she is revealing her own bias.
That's even ingrained in Africa from the days the Dutch went over and created different classes based on which Africans looked more European. So there's actual merit to that statement.
-
ESPN has a long story up today about Mike Tomlin that details in questions of race. Here's a particularly compelling segment, IMO.
Talk to white players who play for a black coach and they will tell you that the color of their coach’s skin does not matter. Of course it doesn’t matter, why should it matter? It doesn’t matter one bit. Talk to African-American players who play for a black coach and they will tell you that the color of their coach’s skin matters deeply, powerfully, necessarily and unavoidably. Of course it matters, it has to matter, it’d better matter, you’re damn right it matters, because it matters, just for starters, to them.
And this is the insoluble paradox at the heart of the racial conversation in the United States, circa 2018: that white America speaks of race as a consideration to be transcended, and black America speaks of race as a force to be acknowledged; that white America believes that the purpose of talking about race is to one day end the conversation, and black America believes that the purpose of talking about race is to one day get the real conversation started.
http://theundefeated.com/features/mike-tomlin-pittsburgh-steelers-in-search-of-the-real-coach/
I think the only thing I struggle with in that piece is the concept of starting the real conversation. Even in my limited time on the planet, it feels like we've been "having a conversation" on race. If we haven't even to start to have the real conversation I'm gonna need a minute to rest up. If we were putting metrics on progress, do we even know what the real conversation is and what success looks like? I get the concept that the conversation is never over, it can't be because there is always something more that can be discussed, etc. but how do we even know if we're making progress if we don't have "an end point" to measure it?
-
Who are you to say that it isn't true? Spike Lee did an entire movie that had that subject as a major theme, School Daze.
Perhaps the exception to the rule.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2017/05/02/before-michelle-barack-obama-asked-another-woman-to-marry-him-then-politics-got-in-the-way/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.195a42ed00ee
-
This is as good an example of WHITE PRIVILEGE as you will see.
According to the story in The Washington Post, here is how things went down:
Three young teen black boys shopped at your Brentwood, MO Nordstrom Rack, two of whom were looking for items for their prom. Employees followed them around the whole time, which they found unacceptable, so they left. One old white woman shopping at that same store had a problem with them being there...which becomes clear when they return to retrieve a hat one of them forgot (he'd taken it off to try on a shirt.) She assumed they were "bums"and shoplifting, and verbally assaulted them as they tried to pick up the hat.
“Now they’re confronted by an elderly white woman in the store who says to them, ‘Would your parents and grandparents be proud of what you’re doing?’ ” Pruitt said. The woman also referred to them as “a bunch of bums,” according to Pruitt.
The boys asked to see a manager, and were told by employees they could not. They left a second time. Once outside a manager flagged them down, and they returned and told him their problem. They have money to spend. They aren't bums. Manager invites them back in, they shop, get in line to pay. As they are paying for their items - paying for their items!!! - they hear an employee on the phone to the police reporting them for shoplifting.
In the meantime, old shriveled up racist Miss Daisy is waiting in line behind them, which is apparently unacceptable because Mr. Manager opens up another register just to check her out so she can leave. He also takes the trouble to walk her to her car. Don't worry. I'm gonna get back to that.
The three kids go outside, wait for the police to arrive, and when they do, show the cops their purchases, their receipts, and the cops say they are free to go.
Story gets press, Nordstrom brings in boys and their families to apologize, and promise new training for employees. Of course, their *policy* is not to have employees call the police unless it's an emergency, and in this case, the employee did not adhere to the policy. The boys would like the situation resolved by Nordstrom doing good deeds for other kids. Because they are good people despite the fact that white people are trash to them 24/7. is as good a definition of WHITE PRIVILEGE as you will ever see.
-
Perhaps the exception to the rule.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2017/05/02/before-michelle-barack-obama-asked-another-woman-to-marry-him-then-politics-got-in-the-way/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.195a42ed00ee
I was wondering who would be the first to feel the need to bring drag Mr. Obama into the conversation.
There were only 2 choices in my mind - you or surgeon. You two never, ever disappoint when the conversation turns to race.
-
This is as good an example of WHITE PRIVILEGE as you will see.
A personal example of white privilege...from the other side (i.e., focusing more on the "privilege" part).
A couple of years ago, my wife and I were in another city for a day trip. We had several hours to kill downtown while we waited for our daughter and her friends. We'd already eaten dinner, the stores were closed, and we were trying to figure out how to spend the time. We could have gone to a bar, I suppose, but that's not really our scene. So, we went to a Hilton and sat in the lobby for 2.5 hours and watched Golden State play Oklahoma City. We weren't guests at the hotel, and didn't buy anything in the bar nearby. Even as we were sitting there watching the game, I was aware of the fact that we probably could not have gotten away with that if we were not white (or if we looked "poor," I suppose). I strongly suspect we'd have been approached and asked if we were guests at the hotel. This has stood out to me as an example of white privilege.
-
I was wondering who would be the first to feel the need to bring drag Mr. Obama into the conversation.
There were only 2 choices in my mind - you or surgeon. You two never, ever disappoint when the conversation turns to race.
I thought we were discussing white privilege not race where the incident with our former president seemed to run counter to white privilege or where whiteness is more acceptable..
-
This is as good an example of WHITE PRIVILEGE as you will see.
According to the story in The Washington Post, here is how things went down:
Three young teen black boys shopped at your Brentwood, MO Nordstrom Rack, two of whom were looking for items for their prom. Employees followed them around the whole time, which they found unacceptable, so they left. One old white woman shopping at that same store had a problem with them being there...which becomes clear when they return to retrieve a hat one of them forgot (he'd taken it off to try on a shirt.) She assumed they were "bums"and shoplifting, and verbally assaulted them as they tried to pick up the hat.
“Now they’re confronted by an elderly white woman in the store who says to them, ‘Would your parents and grandparents be proud of what you’re doing?’ ” Pruitt said. The woman also referred to them as “a bunch of bums,” according to Pruitt.
The boys asked to see a manager, and were told by employees they could not. They left a second time. Once outside a manager flagged them down, and they returned and told him their problem. They have money to spend. They aren't bums. Manager invites them back in, they shop, get in line to pay. As they are paying for their items - paying for their items!!! - they hear an employee on the phone to the police reporting them for shoplifting.
In the meantime, old shriveled up racist Miss Daisy is waiting in line behind them, which is apparently unacceptable because Mr. Manager opens up another register just to check her out so she can leave. He also takes the trouble to walk her to her car. Don't worry. I'm gonna get back to that.
The three kids go outside, wait for the police to arrive, and when they do, show the cops their purchases, their receipts, and the cops say they are free to go.
Story gets press, Nordstrom brings in boys and their families to apologize, and promise new training for employees. Of course, their *policy* is not to have employees call the police unless it's an emergency, and in this case, the employee did not adhere to the policy. The boys would like the situation resolved by Nordstrom doing good deeds for other kids. Because they are good people despite the fact that white people are trash to them 24/7. is as good a definition of WHITE PRIVILEGE as you will ever see.
Not to get technical on you, but that's actually a demonstration of racism and/or situational bias, not privilege. White privilege would actually be that if the three kids were white they wouldn't have to have that experience. Those kids, based on the story, handled themselves admirably but that shouldn't be the default because white kids wouldn't have to worry about handling that situation.
-
I thought we were discussing white privilege not race where the incident with our former president seemed to run counter to white privilege.
Who knew muwarrior69 viewed having a romantic relationship with Barack Obama as such a privilege.
I don't think what you cited is an example of any kind of privilege. But that said, if your position is that one example where being white is disadvantageous proves there's no such thing as white privilege, that's a bad take.
-
Perhaps the exception to the rule.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2017/05/02/before-michelle-barack-obama-asked-another-woman-to-marry-him-then-politics-got-in-the-way/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.195a42ed00ee
What is your point here? She was mixed race. He's mixed race. It doesn't really relate to white priveledge or the color of ones skin being more acceptable
-
What is your point here? She was mixed race. He's mixed race. It doesn't really relate to white priveledge or the color of ones skin being more acceptable
The article states the she was a political liability in furthering his political ambitions and would not have been acceptable in the black community. I thought Ms. Barry stated that increased degrees of whiteness even in the colored communities were considered more acceptable. I would hope in 2018 that the color of ones spouse would not factor into ones political aspirations but if Ms Barry is correct, a minority candidate would be in a more advantageous position and acceptable with a spouse who is more white even in districts where the minority is in the majority.
Now if I am conflating race, racial bias and white privilege maybe I am. Trying to separate race and racism from white privilege is like trying to separate or eliminate the sound of a good song from its melody, it can't be done.
-
Tyme ta lock dis sob two, aina?
-
Tyme ta lock dis sob two, aina?
Smells like a political discussion to me.
-
Tyme ta lock dis sob two, aina?
Before the lock I just want to throw my two cents in.
My philosophy in life is to make the best of the situation I am in. I had no choice in the matter and was not born white.
Rather than use my minority circumstance as an excuse, I did everything in my power to avoid the stereo types that people associate with people of my race. That is not to say I have not been pulled over for driving while black , asked why I was in a hotel bar watching a sporting event ( can I help you sir lol?) or endured countless jokes about p+7%4is size( it gets old after a while especially when you want to be noted for the size of your brain instead) . I just moved on and tried to make myself a better person. I am probably in the minority ( no pun intended) who take this live and let live approach but it has served me well. At the end of the day I built my business without things like minority set asides and never asked for one. I wish more in my community would take the up from the boot straps approach I did.
I can't really speak to what MU should and shouldn't do. The environment is so polarized they are criticized either way. I do wish Lovell had more backbone, I am sure he is trying his best but would be delighted if he didn't cave so quickly.
-
By and large this discussion has been perfectly acceptable and kept from being political. Seems some people want to turn that tide now. Let's keep it to the topic at hand, which is white privilege and tangentially how it relates to Marquette, rather than diving down a political rabbit hole.
-
Before the lock I just want to throw my two cents in.
My philosophy in life is to make the best of the situation I am in. I had no choice in the matter and was not born white.
Rather than use my minority circumstance as an excuse, I did everything in my power to avoid the stereo types that people associate with people of my race. That is not to say I have not been pulled over for driving while black , asked why I was in a hotel bar watching a sporting event ( can I help you sir lol?) or endured countless jokes about p+7%4is size( it gets old after a while especially when you want to be noted for the size of your brain instead) . I just moved on and tried to make myself a better person. I am probably in the minority ( no pun intended) who take this live and let live approach but it has served me well. At the end of the day I built my business without things like minority set asides and never asked for one. I wish more in my community would take the up from the boot straps approach I did.
I can't really speak to what MU should and shouldn't do. The environment is so polarized they are criticized either way. I do wish Lovell had more backbone, I am sure he is trying his best but would be delighted if he didn't cave so quickly.
Does "make myself a better person" involve having intentionally unprotected sex with drunk women?
-
I was wondering who would be the first to feel the need to bring drag Mr. Obama into the conversation.
There were only 2 choices in my mind - you or surgeon. You two never, ever disappoint when the conversation turns to race.
seriously? i had to pop my hood off to re-read your comment, but you forgot to add chicos :-*
-
Not to get technical on you, but that's actually a demonstration of racism and/or situational bias, not privilege. White privilege would actually be that if the three kids were white they wouldn't have to have that experience. Those kids, based on the story, handled themselves admirably but that shouldn't be the default because white kids wouldn't have to worry about handling that situation.
I was just attempting to show what you or I would never have to face because we have white privilege.
But, technically, you are correct 8-)
-
So Brandy, you're not really a URM, hey?
-
seriously? i had to pop my hood off to re-read your comment, but you forgot to add chicos :-*
I read today that Babydavid is also being called a chicos.
-
TheBabyDavid is too sharp to be Chico’s. Note—I am Chico’s fan.
-
tBD appears to me to be the return of Keefe.
-
tBD appears to me to be the return of Keefe.
That seems to be an astute observation.
-
Perhaps the exception to the rule.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2017/05/02/before-michelle-barack-obama-asked-another-woman-to-marry-him-then-politics-got-in-the-way/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.195a42ed00ee
*to add levity*
The only source you can find to support your position is a Domer? One who looks shockingly like a young Martin Short, but still a Domer - the epicenter of white privilege.
*being serious*
Nobody should feel bad about the circumstances they have achieved or using the assets they've been fortunate enough to be born into. Just be humble and understanding that some will have it more difficult walking into the same situation because of their race/ethnicity/IQ/physical need/degree of attractiveness/haircut/religious belief/neighborhood/last name/etc.
-
So Brandy, you're not really a URM, hey?
Not sure what you're sayin', but if you're asking if I am white, the answer is yes.
-
I read today that Babydavid is also being called a chicos.
I love you’re still doing this, Cheeks. Unfortunately TheBabyDavid is way more weird and nuanced than you.
-
I read today that Babydavid is also being called a chicos.
You should be so lucky.
-
White privilege means that when you cross the street, people don't yell 'N' at you out their window as they drive by. As I witnessed two weeks ago while getting ice cream after baseball practice with my 11 year old son and two of his teammates. That was a fun conversation, explaining that in 2018 there are still people that bigoted and stupid in the world. My white male son will never have that yelled at him or have random people come up and obscenely proposition him out of nowhere, as my 23 year old daughter has and actually accepts as normal.
-
White privilege means that when you cross the street, people don't yell 'N' at you out their window at you as they drive by. As I witnessed two weeks ago while getting ice cream after baseball practice with my 11 year old son and two of his teammates. That was a fun conversation, explaining that in 2018 there are still people that bigoted and stupid in the world. My white male son will never have that yelled at him or have random people come up and obscenely proposition him out of nowhere, as my 23 year old daughter has and actually accepts as normal.
White privilege means you don't get the cops called on you, and then get interrogated for 15 minutes, because you fell asleep on a couch in your dorm.
A black graduate student at Yale who fell asleep in her dorm’s common room said she had a disturbing awakening this week when a white student flipped on the lights, told her she had no right to sleep there and called the campus police.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/09/nyregion/yale-black-student-nap.html
-
White privilege means that the cops don't get called when you sit down for a business meeting at Starbucks.
-
White privilege means the cops don't get called when you're leaving your airbnb rental.
-
White privilege means you don't get the cops called on you when you join a University admissions tour.
-
White privilege also means you don't get preferential admittance standards to the finest universities or get hired to fulfill quotas.
-
White privilege is not needing those to attempt (rightly or wrongly) to compensate for decades if not centuries of blatant racism and abuse.
-
White privilege also means you don't get preferential admittance standards to the finest universities or get hired to fulfill quotas.
White privilege means getting to spout bigoted BS like that and get away with it.
-
White privilege also means you don't get preferential admittance standards to the finest universities or get hired to fulfill quotas.
Except they do...relative to Asians.
White privilege means getting to spout bigoted BS like that and get away with it.
Not aware of any specific analysis done on the hiring side. On the university admittance part, it's based on actual studies. The most common study referenced is:
https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf
-
White Privilege means that you don't get handcuffed when studying in the library of the University that you are enrolled in....happened recently at a prestigious University but is being kept hushed to avoid public backlash (costing them a pretty penny to keep it quiet though).
-
White privilege also means you don't get preferential admittance standards to the finest universities or get hired to fulfill quotas.
But see this is the problem here. We aren't debating affirmative action and quotas. We are talking about how the very fact that someone is white gives them a status in every day living that minorities do not have.
IOW, we aren't having a legal debate, but a social one.
-
white privilege means never being told to "go back to where you came from."
white privilege means never being asked "no, where are you FROM?"
white privilege means never being asked "do you speak English" even though you were born in the US and lived here your entire life.
white privilege means never being told "wow, you are very articulate."
white privilege means never being called an "affirmative action hire/admit" (or, if you're a minority woman, a "twofer" or "double boxer").
-
White privilege means you don't get the cops called on you, and then get interrogated for 15 minutes, because you fell asleep on a couch in your dorm.
A black graduate student at Yale who fell asleep in her dorm’s common room said she had a disturbing awakening this week when a white student flipped on the lights, told her she had no right to sleep there and called the campus police.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/09/nyregion/yale-black-student-nap.html
This is the weirdest of all of these recent stories. It's the end of the semester and white chick doesn't know that black lady lives on her floor in a dorm? WTF?
Wouldn't you be more likely to say, "hey you fell asleep in the lounge. good thing you woke up or I would have pulled the hand in the water trick?"
Or are people at Yale that self-absorbed that they don't talk to anyone?
-
white privilege means you don't have to think about what you are wearing or how you are walking down the street, especially at the night
male privilege means you don't have to be anxious about walking anywhere after nightfall
white privilege means that I don't have to think about every single word or movement I make if I get pulled over for speeding
white privilege means I don't have to drive "extra careful" when I'm in the suburbs.
-
Or are people at Yale that self-absorbed that they don't talk to anyone?
you answered your own question there, but you need to add "talk to anyone of a different race, ethnicity or socioeconomic background."
That said, do we know they lived on the same floor?
-
This is the weirdest of all of these recent stories. It's the end of the semester and white chick doesn't know that black lady lives on her floor in a dorm? WTF?
Wouldn't you be more likely to say, "hey you fell asleep in the lounge. good thing you woke up or I would have pulled the hand in the water trick?"
Or are people at Yale that self-absorbed that they don't talk to anyone?
The "white chick" is a 43-year-old PhD candidate (and a complete weirdo, from some of her writings), so probably not socializing too much with the college kids.
-
The "white chick" is a 43-year-old PhD candidate (and a complete weirdo, from some of her writings), so probably not socializing too much with the college kids.
The lady who fell asleep is in her mid thirties so it's not like she's a college kid either
-
It was my assumption that they both lived in a graduate student dorm.
-
White privilege means getting to spout bigoted BS like that and get away with it.
pretty harsh man-there was nothing bigoted about his statement! if warrior would have said that he thinks it's BS that...he was merely making a true statement of fact. i guess he didn't get away with it as you called him out on it
for you to call him out like that is a convenient way to censor him, but i doubt he's awaiting your apology
-
This is the weirdest of all of these recent stories. It's the end of the semester and white chick doesn't know that black lady lives on her floor in a dorm? WTF?
Wouldn't you be more likely to say, "hey you fell asleep in the lounge. good thing you woke up or I would have pulled the hand in the water trick?"
Or are people at Yale that self-absorbed that they don't talk to anyone?
Not Sarah's first time calling the police on a black classmate.
https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2018/05/10/yale-responds-after-black-student-reported-for-napping-in-common-room/
-
pretty harsh man-there was nothing bigoted about his statement! if warrior would have said that he thinks it's BS that...he was merely making a true statement of fact. i guess he didn't get away with it as you called him out on it
for you to call him out like that is a convenient way to censor him, but i doubt he's awaiting your apology
the insinuation was clear - non-whites get preferential and special treatment when it comes to hires and college admissions which, he insinuates, they don't deserve and wouldn't get without those things. Nevermind that AA is not about hiring but opportunity and the quotas are impermissible.
Someday we white guys will get a fair shake in society, right?
-
white privilege means never being told to "go back to where you came from."
white privilege means never being asked "no, where are you FROM?"
May be closer to "American accent privilege". I've worked and spent time with several colleagues who are from eastern Europe. I've witnessed more than a few instances of treatment that ranges from less than stellar to garbage. They also find it frustrating to often be labeled "Russian" or "Soviet", despite not being from Russia, and despite the fact that the Soviet Union does not exist (and for several, never did in their lifetime).
-
This is the weirdest of all of these recent stories. It's the end of the semester and white chick doesn't know that black lady lives on her floor in a dorm? WTF?
Wouldn't you be more likely to say, "hey you fell asleep in the lounge. good thing you woke up or I would have pulled the hand in the water trick?"
Or are people at Yale that self-absorbed that they don't talk to anyone?
They are.
-
May be closer to "American accent privilege". I've worked and spent time with several colleagues who are from eastern Europe. I've witnessed more than a few instances of treatment that ranges from less than stellar to garbage. They also find it frustrating to often be labeled "Russian" or "Soviet", despite not being from Russia, and despite the fact that the Soviet Union does not exist (and for several, never did in their lifetime).
I get that but there is also an automatic "skin isn't white, looks different, must be from somewhere else" reaction white people have. For example, my wife has no accent, she was born and raised all but one year in the US (she was 1 when she lived abroad and her parents had to return to their home country - yep, my wife's an "anchor baby"). She's not the one one of her friends who are also not white who gets asked that question or has been asked wonderful questions like if she's "injun" or "oriental." Even at MU she was referred to derisively by other catty females as an ethnicity she is not.
Yet, in my entire life, I've never been asked where I'm "really from," unless you count East Coast snobs asking if I'm from the Midwest due to my accent. Even my Canadian friends never get asked where they're "actually from."
-
The only truly safe space out there is inside momma's womb. The world is a dangerous place. And the sooner one accepts that profound truth of existence the less disappointment one will suffer.
-
The only truly safe space out there is inside momma's womb. The world is a dangerous place. And the sooner one accepts that profound truth of existence the less disappointment one will suffer.
Holy crap, that opens up a completely different set of white privilege issues. Probably best to just back away from that slowly.
-
The only truly safe space out there is inside momma's womb. The world is a dangerous place. And the sooner one accepts that profound truth of existence the less disappointment one will suffer.
Thank you, Junior Buddha :D
-
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/woman-calls-police-oakland-barbecue_us_5af50125e4b00d7e4c18f741
Barbecueing while black. Add it to the litany of black crime in America.
The "funny" part is that the white woman (using the term loosely) then cried to the police that she was being harassed. Now that is white privilege - harassing blacks and then crying foul because they didn't say "yes'um, ma'am".
-
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/woman-calls-police-oakland-barbecue_us_5af50125e4b00d7e4c18f741
Barbecueing while black. Add it to the litany of black crime in America.
The "funny" part is that the white woman (using the term loosely) then cried to the police that she was being harassed. Now that is white privilege - harassing blacks and then crying foul because they didn't say "yes'um, ma'am".
It's only a crime if someone uses a gas grill. As owners of a Weber charcoal grill, they should be commended for grilling properly.
She's clearly just mad they didn't offer her any (oh snap, fat shaming/thin privilege 8-)).
-
TheBabyDavid is too sharp to be Chico’s. Note—I am Chico’s fan.
You would know better than I, but since someone called me that phrase repeatedly my ears perk up each time someone else is called the same thing.
-
You would know better than I, but since someone called me that phrase repeatedly my ears perk up each time someone else is called the same thing.
Ah, yes. If only you understood what a chicos is. Let me help.
A chicos - someone who tries to masquerade as someone else for socially or politically advantageous reasons because he's so deeply insecure in his own beliefs (or sometimes, simply because he's been banned). A chicos comically fails each time he does this, however, because it's too obvious to absolutely everyone that it's the same person every time. But, a chicos is too warped to understand that everyone knows. For example, a chicos once pretended to be a hoopaloop. Or a black guy. A chicos might also, in the future, hypothetically, pretend to be a Democrat disillusioned by his party.
You’ll know a chicos when you see someone hammering the same topics over and over again, and occasionally trying to name drop. A chicos tends to have an incredibly annoying and unnuanced delivery of his argument, and has generally outdated views on race in America. People on scoop used to get frustrated by a chicos, which he confused as being because he was a rogue teller of uncomfortable truths. It's not. It's because he was a blowhard.
Anyway, people just kind of laugh at a chicos now. I sure wish you could have known him. Unfortunately, he oddly abandoned his most recent iteration right around the time you showed up. It's too bad. You would've really liked him.
-
Ah, yes. If only you understood what a chicos is. Let me help.
A chicos - someone who tries to masquerade as someone else for socially or politically advantageous reasons because he's so deeply insecure in his own beliefs (or sometimes, simply because he's been banned). A chicos comically fails each time he does this, however, because it's too obvious to absolutely everyone that it's the same person every time. But, a chicos is too warped to understand that everyone knows. For example, a chicos once pretended to be a hoopaloop. Or a black guy. A chicos might also, in the future, hypothetically, pretend to be a Democrat disillusioned by his party.
You’ll know a chicos when you see someone hammering the same topics over and over again, and occasionally trying to name drop. A chicos tends to have an incredibly annoying and unnuanced delivery of his argument, and has generally outdated views on race in America. People on scoop used to get frustrated by a chicos, which he confused as being because he was a rogue teller of uncomfortable truths. It's not. It's because he was a blowhard.
Anyway, people just kind of laugh at a chicos now. I sure wish you could have known him. Unfortunately, he oddly abandoned his most recent iteration right around the time you showed up. It's too bad. You would've really liked him.
Score
-
Ah, yes. If only you understood what a chicos is. Let me help.
A chicos - someone who tries to masquerade as someone else for socially or politically advantageous reasons because he's so deeply insecure in his own beliefs (or sometimes, simply because he's been banned). A chicos comically fails each time he does this, however, because it's too obvious to absolutely everyone that it's the same person every time. But, a chicos is too warped to understand that everyone knows. For example, a chicos once pretended to be a hoopaloop. Or a black guy. A chicos might also, in the future, hypothetically, pretend to be a Democrat disillusioned by his party.
You’ll know a chicos when you see someone hammering the same topics over and over again, and occasionally trying to name drop. A chicos tends to have an incredibly annoying and unnuanced delivery of his argument, and has generally outdated views on race in America. People on scoop used to get frustrated by a chicos, which he confused as being because he was a rogue teller of uncomfortable truths. It's not. It's because he was a blowhard.
Anyway, people just kind of laugh at a chicos now. I sure wish you could have known him. Unfortunately, he oddly abandoned his most recent iteration right around the time you showed up. It's too bad. You would've really liked him.
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.carbonated.tv/130620_story__go-to-sleep-knockout.gif)
-
Ah, yes. If only you understood what a chicos is. Let me help.
A chicos - someone who tries to masquerade as someone else for socially or politically advantageous reasons because he's so deeply insecure in his own beliefs (or sometimes, simply because he's been banned). A chicos comically fails each time he does this, however, because it's too obvious to absolutely everyone that it's the same person every time. But, a chicos is too warped to understand that everyone knows. For example, a chicos once pretended to be a hoopaloop. Or a black guy. A chicos might also, in the future, hypothetically, pretend to be a Democrat disillusioned by his party.
You’ll know a chicos when you see someone hammering the same topics over and over again, and occasionally trying to name drop. A chicos tends to have an incredibly annoying and unnuanced delivery of his argument, and has generally outdated views on race in America. People on scoop used to get frustrated by a chicos, which he confused as being because he was a rogue teller of uncomfortable truths. It's not. It's because he was a blowhard.
Anyway, people just kind of laugh at a chicos now. I sure wish you could have known him. Unfortunately, he oddly abandoned his most recent iteration right around the time you showed up. It's too bad. You would've really liked him.
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/PitifulDirectAfricanfisheagle-max-1mb.gif)
-
Ah, yes. If only you understood what a chicos is. Let me help.
A chicos - someone who tries to masquerade as someone else for socially or politically advantageous reasons because he's so deeply insecure in his own beliefs (or sometimes, simply because he's been banned). A chicos comically fails each time he does this, however, because it's too obvious to absolutely everyone that it's the same person every time. But, a chicos is too warped to understand that everyone knows. For example, a chicos once pretended to be a hoopaloop. Or a black guy. A chicos might also, in the future, hypothetically, pretend to be a Democrat disillusioned by his party.
You’ll know a chicos when you see someone hammering the same topics over and over again, and occasionally trying to name drop. A chicos tends to have an incredibly annoying and unnuanced delivery of his argument, and has generally outdated views on race in America. People on scoop used to get frustrated by a chicos, which he confused as being because he was a rogue teller of uncomfortable truths. It's not. It's because he was a blowhard.
Anyway, people just kind of laugh at a chicos now. I sure wish you could have known him. Unfortunately, he oddly abandoned his most recent iteration right around the time you showed up. It's too bad. You would've really liked him.
Drop the effen mic!
-
Holy cow!! Talk about rent free.
Hopefully that’ll hold ya over till the next “Chico’s sighting” anyway...phew!! 🙄
-
Actually, the Romans were quite decent to its conquered minorities so long as they didn't do anything silly like rebel.
The Romans indeed behaved splendidly towards their conquered peoples so long as said populations assimilated into mainstream Roman culture. Otherwise, being subject to Rome was a tradition of rape, massacre, slavery, and genocidal eradication.
Any reading of Suetonius, Livy, and especially Tacitus reveals barbarism on an epic scale.
-
The only truly safe space out there is inside momma's womb. The world is a dangerous place. And the sooner one accepts that profound truth of existence the less disappointment one will suffer.
I listened to a great podcast this week about how the black infant/childbirth mortality rate (both mothers and children) is twice as high as white. Even accounting for education level...in fact, a black mother with an advanced degree is still more likely to die in childbirth than a white woman with a high school education.
Why? The podcast chalked it up to white privilege. Black women aren't listened to by their doctors when they have legitimate concerns (the podcast profiled a woman who had all the symptoms of a really serious condition, but docs thought her complains of headaches were "made up" or overblown). They also said that black women are far more likely to meet their delivery doc IN delivery than white women.
So yeah, white privilege extends into the womb too.
-
I listened to a great podcast this week about how the black infant/childbirth mortality rate (both mothers and children) is twice as high as white. Even accounting for education level...in fact, a black mother with an advanced degree is still more likely to die in childbirth than a white woman with a high school education.
Why? The podcast chalked it up to white privilege. Black women aren't listened to by their doctors when they have legitimate concerns (the podcast profiled a woman who had all the symptoms of a really serious condition, but docs thought her complains of headaches were "made up" or overblown). They also said that black women are far more likely to meet their delivery doc IN delivery than white women.
So yeah, white privilege extends into the womb too.
I don't pretend that white privilege doesn't exist. It most definitely does, but this example seems somewhat ridiculous.
Chalking something up to white privilege based on the profile of one woman who happened to be black? That's a bit of a stretch. I'm sure there are women of every race who have similar experiences of doctors not taking their concerns seriously. My sister-in-law (who's white) finally switched OBs because she didn't feel as though hers was listening to her.
In terms of not meeting the doctor, is the claim that doctors won't see their minority patients for regular office visits? Or are they sending a PA or nurse in their place? If not, I don't get how that related to race. I mean, if someone isn't going to their prenatal check-ups, does that mean her OB is racist? Maybe I'm missing something obvious but I don't follow the logic of that one.
-
The Romans indeed behaved splendidly towards their conquered peoples so long as said populations assimilated into mainstream Roman culture. Otherwise, being subject to Rome was a tradition of rape, massacre, slavery, and genocidal eradication.
Any reading of Suetonius, Livy, and especially Tacitus reveals barbarism on an epic scale.
Cut and paste?
-
Cut and paste?
Keefe's back?!
-
I don't pretend that white privilege doesn't exist. It most definitely does, but this example seems somewhat ridiculous.
Chalking something up to white privilege based on the profile of one woman who happened to be black? That's a bit of a stretch. I'm sure there are women of every race who have similar experiences of doctors not taking their concerns seriously. My sister-in-law (who's white) finally switched OBs because she didn't feel as though hers was listening to her.
In terms of not meeting the doctor, is the claim that doctors won't see their minority patients for regular office visits? Or are they sending a PA or nurse in their place? If not, I don't get how that related to race. I mean, if someone isn't going to their prenatal check-ups, does that mean her OB is racist? Maybe I'm missing something obvious but I don't follow the logic of that one.
I can't say it as well as the podcast did. It was Friday's "The Daily" https://www.nytimes.com/podcasts/the-daily . Only about 20 minutes.
I'd also like to point out, that just because there is white privilege, does not necessarily mean that someone is racist. It's more about the implicit biases we all carry (even minorities...as the famous Clark baby doll experiment showed). The pod quoted studies that show that doctors think that black patients in general have higher pain tolerances and need less medication than white patients, despite there being no medical reason for this. That is an implicit bias that doctors carry...but that doesn't mean the doctors are racist.
-
I can't say it as well as the podcast did. It was Friday's "The Daily" https://www.nytimes.com/podcasts/the-daily . Only about 20 minutes.
I'd also like to point out, that just because there is white privilege, does not necessarily mean that someone is racist. It's more about the implicit biases we all carry (even minorities...as the famous Clark baby doll experiment showed). The pod quoted studies that show that doctors think that black patients in general have higher pain tolerances and need less medication than white patients, despite there being no medical reason for this. That is an implicit bias that doctors carry...but that doesn't mean the doctors are racist.
Tangentially related: as the father of four children, experience has taught me that they have differing pain tolerance. A single complaint of pain from one of my kids will get an extremely different response than repeated complaints from another. Obviously, it's not an issue of loving one more than the other.
So, I'll agree, to an extent, that assuming blacks as a group have higher pain tolerance might not technically be "racist." But I would think it is definitely problematic and should not influence care. My reaction to my kids is well-informed and based upon specific interactions and observations relating to each of them as individuals.
-
I can't say it as well as the podcast did. It was Friday's "The Daily" https://www.nytimes.com/podcasts/the-daily . Only about 20 minutes.
I'd also like to point out, that just because there is white privilege, does not necessarily mean that someone is racist. It's more about the implicit biases we all carry (even minorities...as the famous Clark baby doll experiment showed). The pod quoted studies that show that doctors think that black patients in general have higher pain tolerances and need less medication than white patients, despite there being no medical reason for this. That is an implicit bias that doctors carry...but that doesn't mean the doctors are racist.
Thought I should cite my sources on this one: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/04/04/do-blacks-feel-less-pain-than-whites-their-doctors-may-think-so/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b32b7ec5f05e
-
I don't pretend that white privilege doesn't exist. It most definitely does, but this example seems somewhat ridiculous.
Chalking something up to white privilege based on the profile of one woman who happened to be black? That's a bit of a stretch. I'm sure there are women of every race who have similar experiences of doctors not taking their concerns seriously. My sister-in-law (who's white) finally switched OBs because she didn't feel as though hers was listening to her.
In terms of not meeting the doctor, is the claim that doctors won't see their minority patients for regular office visits? Or are they sending a PA or nurse in their place? If not, I don't get how that related to race. I mean, if someone isn't going to their prenatal check-ups, does that mean her OB is racist? Maybe I'm missing something obvious but I don't follow the logic of that one.
It's hard to say if it's white privilege or not, but it's really more about identifying that individuals and groups have biases for all sorts of reasons and more often than not they aren't obvious at the individual level. In the scenario represented, the doctors had biases that impacted patient care, addressing that issue is important.
-
I don't pretend that white privilege doesn't exist. It most definitely does, but this example seems somewhat ridiculous.
Chalking something up to white privilege based on the profile of one woman who happened to be black? That's a bit of a stretch. I'm sure there are women of every race who have similar experiences of doctors not taking their concerns seriously. My sister-in-law (who's white) finally switched OBs because she didn't feel as though hers was listening to her.
In terms of not meeting the doctor, is the claim that doctors won't see their minority patients for regular office visits? Or are they sending a PA or nurse in their place? If not, I don't get how that related to race. I mean, if someone isn't going to their prenatal check-ups, does that mean her OB is racist? Maybe I'm missing something obvious but I don't follow the logic of that one.
There may be some white privilege involved here, but when it comes to the reality of medicine in the US today. More often than not it's doctors following the instructions of insurance companies. I had to go to a doctor three times before I could get a MRI ordered for a suspected (and subsequently confirmed) herniated disc, and it was only after I kept hounding her for on. The insurance company didn't want to pay for it, that's what it comes down to more than anything.
-
There may be some white privilege involved here, but when it comes to the reality of medicine in the US today. More often than not it's doctors following the instructions of insurance companies. I had to go to a doctor three times before I could get a MRI ordered for a suspected (and subsequently confirmed) herniated disc, and it was only after I kept hounding her for on. The insurance company didn't want to pay for it, that's what it comes down to more than anything.
Well and doctors not necessarily looking at the total picture (i.e. optimizing patient outcomes vs what the best solution is from a doctor's perspective). My wife has a number of patients who get surgery to fix a problem but because of other factors (patient is obese, has other orthopedic issues, lives the 4th floor of an apartment, etc) they are actually worse off than if they had pursued other remedies. As a society we almost never understand the bigger picture.
-
Kurt Vonnegut wrote a short story about the end of privilege in America. Called "Harrison Bergeron", it is set in 2081, the year in which everyone finally is equal. Thanks to the 212th, 213th and 214th amendments, "smart" privilege, "good looking" privilege and "talented/athletic" privilege (the final, most stubborn of the privileges) have been eliminated. The Handicapper General's minions implant loud radios in the brains of the smart, force the beautiful to wear grotesque masks and impose various handicaps on the graceful and athletic. The point? True "equality" comes at a high price that almost no-one would be willing to pay. Don't get me wrong - I hate discrimination and realize this country still has tons to do to level the playing field. But some of the stuff in this thread seems to me be looking for the smallest grievances that might divide us.
-
Keefe's back?!
:-X
-
Kurt Vonnegut wrote a short story about the end of privilege in America. Called "Harrison Bergeron", it is set in 2081, the year in which everyone finally is equal. Thanks to the 212th, 213th and 214th amendments, "smart" privilege, "good looking" privilege and "talented/athletic" privilege (the final, most stubborn of the privileges) have been eliminated. The Handicapper General's minions implant loud radios in the brains of the smart, force the beautiful to wear grotesque masks and impose various handicaps on the graceful and athletic. The point? True "equality" comes at a high price that almost no-one would be willing to pay. Don't get me wrong - I hate discrimination and realize this country still has tons to do to level the playing field. But some of the stuff in this thread seems to me be looking for the smallest grievances that might divide us.
I think this is a completely relevant point to mention. PC culture can go too far. But I also think this thread has stayed pretty consistent with a single object of discrimination: race. And that ain’t about political correctness. Given the nation’s original sin, and then what has shamefully followed it (especially Jim Crow, whose echoes reverberate everywhere), race equality shouldn’t get lumped in with that kind of satire - nor did Vonnegut intend it to.
-
I think this is a completely relevant point to mention. PC culture can go too far. But I also think this thread has stayed pretty consistent with a single object of discrimination: race. And that ain’t about political correctness. Given the nation’s original sin, and then what has shamefully followed it (especially Jim Crow, whose echoes reverberate everywhere), race equality shouldn’t get lumped in with that kind of satire - nor did Vonnegut intend it to.
Don't disagree at all. We have a history to overcome and need to be vigilant. That said, I don't want true progress to be sidetracked by arguments that divide over what are (IMO anyway) rather minor, sometimes even beside the point complaints about "privilege".
-
There are minor, silly, trivial gripes. Race generally isn't one of them.
-
Don't disagree at all. We have a history to overcome and need to be vigilant. That said, I don't want true progress to be sidetracked by arguments that divide over what are (IMO anyway) rather minor, sometimes even beside the point complaints about "privilege".
I don't think they're minor. I think they're important because it points out the everyday situations that racial minorities have to deal with. We have mostly overcome the large, institutional battles over race. But it's the nagging everyday ones that need to be dealt with. Again, just keeping quiet about them doesn't help solve them.
I just think it's important to not throw stones when having these conversations and by-and-large that has been the case in this thread.
-
Similar to the Starbucks incident, another African American targeted this time at a Cheesecake Factory in Miami. There is a twist this time, but if we are going to be a fair society, this cannot happen either.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/05/15/cheesecake-factory-apologizes-after-report-black-man-being-harassed-wearing-maga-hat/611475002/
-
Ugly story with a cool ending. Police basically telling the woman to STFU.
https://www.theroot.com/white-woman-called-the-cops-on-black-real-estate-agent-1826044836
-
Similar to the Starbucks incident, another African American targeted this time at a Cheesecake Factory in Miami. There is a twist this time, but if we are going to be a fair society, this cannot happen either.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/05/15/cheesecake-factory-apologizes-after-report-black-man-being-harassed-wearing-maga-hat/611475002/
I read the original story from The Daily Wire. I'm not sure how that is anything even in the same zip code as the Starbucks incident. Has nothing to do with privilege, race, etc
-
Ugly story with a cool ending. Police basically telling the woman to STFU.
https://www.theroot.com/white-woman-called-the-cops-on-black-real-estate-agent-1826044836
Seems to be a trend (or at least a previously hidden trend is surfacing) of people calling the cops on minorities for no good reason. Glad this one turned out decently but the cops need to spend a little more time telling people to STFU with stupid stuff generally.
-
I don't think they're minor. I think they're important because it points out the everyday situations that racial minorities have to deal with. We have mostly overcome the large, institutional battles over race. But it's the nagging everyday ones that need to be dealt with. Again, just keeping quiet about them doesn't help solve them.
I just think it's important to not throw stones when having these conversations and by-and-large that has been the case in this thread.
Saw an interview with Kareem Abdul Jabar last night, and he was addressing this type of stuff and I thought he really made a good point. When issues like this are brought up he thought it important that those who bring it up not do so as if its an accusation and those being informed not receive it as an accusation. It was a very insightful point about how you deliver/receive a message being almost as important as the message itself.
-
Seems to be a trend (or at least a previously hidden trend is surfacing) of people calling the cops on minorities for no good reason. Glad this one turned out decently but the cops need to spend a little more time telling people to STFU with stupid stuff generally.
I'd guess it's less a trend and more a result of everyone carrying around a phone with video camera these days to record these events.
-
I read the original story from The Daily Wire. I'm not sure how that is anything even in the same zip code as the Starbucks incident. Has nothing to do with privilege, race, etc
when you're dealing with the biggest bunch of snowflakes in the world (you know, the kind who destroy products they've already bought to make a political statement) it's worse than the Starbucks incident x1000. Besidesm the employees were promptly fired.
-
I'd guess it's less a trend and more a result of everyone carrying around a phone with video camera these days to record these events.
I'm guessing that having video at the ready didn't precipitate these types of events. I suspect they have always gone on but we now "notice" them because people are posting them to the internet. Hence an existing trend is exposed versus a whole new trend starting.
-
I'd guess it's less a trend and more a result of everyone carrying around a phone with video camera these days to record these events.
If only these folks would learn to shoot cellphone video in landscape instead of portrait mode. >:(
-
I'm guessing that having video at the ready didn't precipitate these types of events. I suspect they have always gone on but we now "notice" them because people are posting them to the internet. Hence an existing trend is exposed versus a whole new trend starting.
Yes, that's what I'm saying (perhaps less artfully). These types of incidents have always occurred. We just know about them now because there's readily available video evidence.
-
when you're dealing with the biggest bunch of snowflakes in the world (you know, the kind who destroy products they've already bought to make a political statement) it's worse than the Starbucks incident x1000. Besidesm the employees were promptly fired.
Indeed. One's race is not of one's choosing. Specific articles of clothing most definitely are.
-
Saw an interview with Kareem Abdul Jabar last night, and he was addressing this type of stuff and I thought he really made a good point. When issues like this are brought up he thought it important that those who bring it up not do so as if its an accusation and those being informed not receive it as an accusation. It was a very insightful point about how you deliver/receive a message being almost as important as the message itself.
Kareem is a wise man.
-
https://www.theroot.com/white-woman-called-the-cops-on-black-real-estate-agent-1826044836
Amazing where one finds these links.
-
Ugly story with a cool ending. Police basically telling the woman to STFU.
https://www.theroot.com/white-woman-called-the-cops-on-black-real-estate-agent-1826044836
I think it's important that these get posted too. It helps tone down the reactionary response and show more of "what to do" than "what we don't want"
-
Amazing where one finds these links.
I found it on Deadspin.
EDIT: No sorry. Found it on a friend's Facebook page.
-
Yes, that's what I'm saying (perhaps less artfully). These types of incidents have always occurred. We just know about them now because there's readily available video evidence.
OK, I assumed as much but my deciphering skills were failing me. ;D
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/newyork/man-loses-his-mind-and-threatens-to-call-ice-because-a-couple-of-workers-at-a-deli-were-speaking-spanish-to-a-customer
What is wrong with people?
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/newyork/man-loses-his-mind-and-threatens-to-call-ice-because-a-couple-of-workers-at-a-deli-were-speaking-spanish-to-a-customer
What is wrong with people?
He seems rather unstable. Just Googled - this troll effort is glorious!
-
I read the original story from The Daily Wire. I'm not sure how that is anything even in the same zip code as the Starbucks incident. Has nothing to do with privilege, race, etc
It may or may not. Was he targeted because of his hat and his color? If he was a white guy wearing the hat, would he have been targeted? I'm not sure we know that yet, but what we do know it a man of color was taunted by wait staff at a major restaurant chain for wearing a political hat. That cannot be tolerated no matter how much I despise our president. None of us should be tolerating that.
The employees were suspended through yesterday, but today they were fired. http://time.com/5279851/cheesecake-factory-trump-maga-hats/
-
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/05/16/us/ap-us-school-board-police-insults.html
Smile, you’re on candid camera, eyn’a? There are credible cases and then there are those that ruin it for the credible cases. These are the ones that Provoke and incite real safety issues for the blue and put many unnecessarily in more harms way than they already are-sad.
-
It may or may not. Was he targeted because of his hat and his color? If he was a white guy wearing the hat, would he have been targeted? I'm not sure we know that yet, but what we do know it a man of color was taunted by wait staff at a major restaurant chain for wearing a political hat. That cannot be tolerated no matter how much I despise our president. None of us should be tolerating that.
The employees were suspended through yesterday, but today they were fired. http://time.com/5279851/cheesecake-factory-trump-maga-hats/
Cheekz, no appreciation for taking the time to explain what a chicos is for you? So ungrateful. That cannot be tolerated. None of us should be tolerating that.
-
Cheekz, no appreciation for taking the time to explain what a chicos is for you? So ungrateful. That cannot be tolerated. None of us should be tolerating that.
What's a Cheekz?
-
Cheekz, no appreciation for taking the time to explain what a chicos is for you? So ungrateful. That cannot be tolerated. None of us should be tolerating that.
And I have an obsession with Chico’s? What does he have to do with this discussion? Oh well, as long as you brought him up- free the man!
-
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/05/16/us/ap-us-school-board-police-insults.html
Smile, you’re on candid camera, eyn’a? There are credible cases and then there are those that ruin it for the credible cases. These are the ones that Provoke and incite real safety issues for the blue and put many unnecessarily in more harms way than they already are-sad.
1. This school board member appears to be an idiot.
2. How does this "ruin it" for credible cases? Credible cases of what? She made no allegation that she was mistreated. She got into an argument with a cop.
3. As always, whether it involves sex assault on campus, racial discrimination or whatever, there are some (like you!) who cynically cite the rare false report as a means to cast doubt on all reports, regardless of their merits.
-
Y'all don't know what it's like being male, middle-class and white.
-
1. This school board member appears to be an idiot.
2. How does this "ruin it" for credible cases? Credible cases of what? She made no allegation that she was mistreated. She got into an argument with a cop.
3. As always, whether it involves sex assault on campus, racial discrimination or whatever, there are some (like you!) who cynically cite the rare false report as a means to cast doubt on all reports, regardless of their merits.
Should be noted that here in Jersey we've had two stories in the past year in small towns with police officers being exposed as having white nationalist "hobbies" and/or "sympathies".
If you live here and follow the news, her reaction doesn't seem random.
-
Should be noted that here in Jersey we've had two stories in the past year in small towns with police officers being exposed as having white nationalist "hobbies" and/or "sympathies".
If you live here and follow the news, her reaction doesn't seem random.
Labeling someone a skinhead simply because he happens to share the same profession and home state as an actual skinhead hardly seems reasonable.
-
Labeling someone a skinhead simply because he happens to share the same profession and home state as an actual skinhead hardly seems reasonable.
that is true. However, an FBI report from around 10 years ago found that white supremacist groups had made it a priority to join law enforcement agencies, which is deeply concerning:
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/31/the-fbi-has-quietly-investigated-white-supremacist-infiltration-of-law-enforcement/
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/newyork/man-loses-his-mind-and-threatens-to-call-ice-because-a-couple-of-workers-at-a-deli-were-speaking-spanish-to-a-customer
What is wrong with people?
I could answer that, but we are supposed to stay away from politics
-
One's race is not of one's choosing.
And yet Rachel Dolezal not only chose to be black but was hired to run the NAACP in Spokane while also teaching African American studies at a university.
But this begs the question: if one cannot choose one's race then how is it possible to choose one's gender? Now, theBabyDavid is a scientist, and an accomplished one at that, and therefore has accepted the scientific fact that gender is determined by chromosomes.
And yet there are those who say that gender is a personal choice.
So, theBabyDavid is terribly confused: If race is an empirical fact why then is gender not?
Fr Davitt taught us that situational ethics is not possible. Eliminating facts as a convenience is not just obtuse but, indeed, dangerous.
-
So, theBabyDavid is terribly confused: If race is an empirical fact why then is gender not?
I don't know, but it is probably the fault of those damn, lazy firefighters.
-
Most things are.
I am going to miss this thread.
-
And yet Rachel Dolezal not only chose to be black but was hired to run the NAACP in Spokane while also teaching African American studies at a university.
But this begs the question: if one cannot choose one's race then how is it possible to choose one's gender? Now, theBabyDavid is a scientist, and an accomplished one at that, and therefore has accepted the scientific fact that gender is determined by chromosomes.
And yet there are those who say that gender is a personal choice.
So, theBabyDavid is terribly confused: If race is an empirical fact why then is gender not?
Sex and gender are not synonymous. Sex is biologically determined. Gender is a social construct.
Likewise, race is a social construct. There is no "black" gene .
-
Sex and gender are not synonymous. Sex is biologically determined. Gender is a social construct.
Likewise, race is a social construct. There is no "black" gene .
Ya know who might know such things....an accomplished scientist....alas
-
Ya know who might know such things....an accomplished scientist....alas
Lol
-
Y'all don't know what it's like being male, middle-class and white.
tell me about it. from my upper class perch, I can't see the plebeians.
-
Thread seems to be on its way out so, for all you old farts, this is the talk of young folks. Worth watching the whole thing. Also, the song is as kick-ass as the video.
This is america. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYOjWnS4cMY
-
Y'all don't know what it's like being male, middle-class and white.
bought my tickets yesterday - if you've not seen him with your local symphony it's well worth whatever the ticket price is
Thread seems to be on its way out so, for all you old farts, this is the talk of young folks. Worth watching the whole thing. Also, the song is as kick-ass as the video.
This is america. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYOjWnS4cMY
not all old farts are the same - this one loves him some Childish Gambino and that is a fantastic song/video
-
I don't know, but it is probably the fault of those damn, lazy firefighters.
Who said fire fighters are lazy? They do damned important work.
What's funny is there is a Marquette grad who just last week secured a $25MM capital raise to install stored energy systems into Alaska Native villages. These villages currently spend almost $1/kWH for power. This project will reduce that cost to less than $0.30/kWH.
I guess some of us put our education to work making combustion more efficient and practical. Others have an education but choose to spend their time learning out how to extinguish combustion.
There is a profound difference beteen the two. But thank God there are people willing to do both.
-
To give perspective, the typical Alaskan Native family living in an off-grid tribal community spends $1,000/head for power each month. That means a family of 5 spends about $60,000 a year for thermal and electrical energy.
Compelling new technologies are being deployed to rationalize the cost of energy while also reducing the impact of toxic emissions.
-
Gender is a social construct.
That is an opinion. Not a fact.
-
That is an opinion. Not a fact.
Just like the earth being round
-
Who said fire fighters are lazy? They do damned important work.
Oh sorry, my bad. I totally had you confused with the guy who said this stuff.
While you have been sitting in your firehouse
Now, don't get me wrong, as a fighter pilot, I was always comforted by the presence of those brave young men and women who stood at the ready on the flight line in their crash trucks. But I rather doubt that very many actually had college degrees because the job simply doesn't require it.
I presume you have a lot of free time between polishing the trucks
So, while some of us are making a real difference in clean power generation others have settled for less in life.
Fact is, your lack of professional intensity allows you more time to think about the subject though not really offering any meaningful insight.
Weird coincidence, though, that guy also claims to be into new energy technology.
-
Y'all don't know what it's like being male, middle-class and white.
Don't forget the burden of wearing a too tight sweater vest.
-
Just like the earth being round
An oblate ellipsoid, actually.
-
To give perspective, the typical Alaskan Native family living in an off-grid tribal community spends $1,000/head for power each month. That means a family of 5 spends about $60,000 a year for thermal and electrical energy.
Compelling new technologies are being deployed to rationalize the cost of energy while also reducing the impact of toxic emissions.
Sounds like this will mean more people might move to Alaska, which I hope doesn't happen. Love the place. Making it too cozy will lead to some destruction of it as people move there and say it isn't so bad as costs come down. Always a flip side of the story.
-
Cheekz, no appreciation for taking the time to explain what a chicos is for you? So ungrateful. That cannot be tolerated. None of us should be tolerating that.
I wish I had a personal interpreter like the UN uses for their envoys to understand what you are saying.
-
And yet Rachel Dolezal not only chose to be black but was hired to run the NAACP in Spokane while also teaching African American studies at a university.
No, she chose to "identify" as black. One cannot choose to be a different race or ethnicity even if they fully immerse themselves in the traditions and ways of another race or ethnicity (anyone remember the Seinfeld episode where Elaine thought her boyfriend might be black?). African-Americans can be accused of "selling out" and "acting white" but in reality how they act will never overtake the way they look in the eyes of society. My buddy is a dentist, he's white but his last name causes patients to believe he's Korean. So, when they come in for the first time people say "oh, you don't look like I thought you would."
-
Sex and gender are not synonymous.
Well,
From Websters...
a : sex, the feminine gender
Those are words that have always been synonyms.
-
Well,
From Websters...
a : sex, the feminine gender
Those are words that have always been synonyms.
Actually words don't have static meanings, so they haven't "always" been synonyms. The word "gender" was almost primarily about the masculine and feminine forms of nouns in languages rather than having anything to do with biological sex. It didn't primarily become a synonym for sex until the 1900s.
Anyway, here is the current definition according to the Oxford English Dictionary:
"Either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female."
-
Actually words don't have static meanings, so they haven't "always" been synonyms. The word "gender" was almost primarily about the masculine and feminine forms of nouns in languages rather than having anything to do with biological sex. It didn't primarily become a synonym for sex until the 1900s.
Anyway, here is the current definition according to the Oxford English Dictionary:
"Either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female."
So the word has no meaning or could mean whatever you want it to mean. When we cannot agree on the meaning of a word we lose all basis for having a discussion.
-
So the word has no meaning or could mean whatever you want it to mean. When we cannot agree on the meaning of a word we lose all basis for having a discussion.
Uh...where did I say that a word "has no meaning or could mean whatever you want it to mean?"
What I said that the meanings of words change over time. For instance, if I said "I am gay" today, it would mean something completely different than it did 100 years ago. So the meaning of the word "gender" can change so it is different than "sex."
-
Uh...where did I say that a word "has no meaning or could mean whatever you want it to mean?"
What I said that the meanings of words change over time. For instance, if I said "I am gay" today, it would mean something completely different than it did 100 years ago. So the meaning of the word "gender" can change so it is different than "sex."
I am so delighted that you are happy.
-
Well,
From Websters...
a : sex, the feminine gender
Those are words that have always been synonyms.
You accidentally forgot to include the full definition, the rest of which is
"the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex."
Your oversight is forgiven.
-
Well,
From Websters...
a : sex, the feminine gender
Those are words that have always been synonyms.
The discussion brought up by the new incarnation of Keefe was in regards to science.
In science (and sociology), gender and sex are not synonymous.
Sex is defined genetically. Typically Male (XY) and Female (XX) are defined by their chromosome arrangement. Contrary to what Keefe implied, it is not a hard and fixed rule. There are XX males, typically due to the presence of an active copy of the SRY gene that results in the formation of testes.
They can also be XX-male and not have a functional copy of the SRY gene, but other mutations on the X chromosome.
It is even more complicated because XXY, and other chromosome arrangements do occur in nature.
Gender on the other hand is by definition a social construct. It is a construct that differentiates Masculine vs Feminine traits as defined by society.
By people that are not scientists, the two words are often misconstrued, and used interchangeably, but scientifically they have distinct and separate meanings.
And as science often does, our definition of sex has evolved as we have developed a better understanding of genetics. Thus, sex is not a dichotomy, but a fluid continuum.
Race on the other hand, as people have noted, can not be defined genetically, and is regarded in science as a sociological trait...like gender.
-
Saw an interview with Kareem Abdul Jabar last night, and he was addressing this type of stuff and I thought he really made a good point. When issues like this are brought up he thought it important that those who bring it up not do so as if its an accusation and those being informed not receive it as an accusation. It was a very insightful point about how you deliver/receive a message being almost as important as the message itself.
Read the book Leadership and Self Deception or more simply start every conversation respecting the other person and being genuinely curious in what they have to say.
-
Sounds like this will mean more people might move to Alaska, which I hope doesn't happen. Love the place. Making it too cozy will lead to some destruction of it as people move there and say it isn't so bad as costs come down. Always a flip side of the story.
Actually, we are focused on improving the quality of life for the thousands of off-the grid Alaska Natives who reside in ancestral communities. We are pivoting them from running old marine diesels 24 hours a day at >40% efficiency to stored energy systems combined with CoGen platforms fueled by H2-enriched CH4, C3H8 and even C12H23.
Not only do we reduce the cost of thermal and electrical power by two thirds but we also slash emissions of GHG to almost negligible amounts - especially NOx, SOx, and CO.
The only place I can think white people might intrude would be some of the Chugach communities in the south. There are already lots of gweilo in the ARNC communities on the North Slope but they are there only to pull more hydrocarbons out of the earth.
-
No, she chose to "identify" as black. One cannot choose to be a different race or ethnicity even if they fully immerse themselves in the traditions and ways of another race or ethnicity (anyone remember the Seinfeld episode where Elaine thought her boyfriend might be black?). African-Americans can be accused of "selling out" and "acting white" but in reality how they act will never overtake the way they look in the eyes of society. My buddy is a dentist, he's white but his last name causes patients to believe he's Korean. So, when they come in for the first time people say "oh, you don't look like I thought you would."
I am stymied by yet another profound contradiction of contemporary American society: If, as you say, one may choose to identify as being a member of another race why then is half the country outraged when a teenage girl in Utah buys a second hand cheongsam to wear to prom?
People who accept "racial identification" as a meritorious principle will turn around and fume and rage over a Caucasian wearing a dashiki, cheongsam, serape, fez, or kebaya.
Now I get that one must not wear a police uniform in an attempt to hoodwink the public but a teenage girl wearing a cheongsam is neither a crime nor an insult.
The misplaced outrage of many is not just absurd but dangerous to a free, democratic society.
-
I am stymied by yet another profound contradiction of contemporary American society: If, as you say, one may choose to identify as being a member of another race why then is half the country outraged when a teenage girl in Utah buys a second hand cheongsam to wear to prom?
People who accept "racial identification" as a meritorious principle will turn around and fume and rage over a Caucasian wearing a dashiki, cheongsam, serape, fez, or kebaya.
Now I get that one must not wear a police uniform in an attempt to hoodwink the public but a teenage girl wearing a cheongsam is neither a crime nor an insult.
The misplaced outrage of many is not just absurd but dangerous to a free, democratic society.
Saying half the country is a pretty broad stroke of the left. I think that is a vocal reactive group that wants everyone to be guilty of something.
-
The discussion brought up by the new incarnation of Keefe was in regards to science.
In science (and sociology), gender and sex are not synonymous.
Sex is defined genetically. Typically Male (XY) and Female (XX) are defined by their chromosome arrangement. Contrary to what Keefe implied, it is not a hard and fixed rule. There are XX males, typically due to the presence of an active copy of the SRY gene that results in the formation of testes.
They can also be XX-male and not have a functional copy of the SRY gene, but other mutations on the X chromosome.
It is even more complicated because XXY, and other chromosome arrangements do occur in nature.
Gender on the other hand is by definition a social construct. It is a construct that differentiates Masculine vs Feminine traits as defined by society.
By people that are not scientists, the two words are often misconstrued, and used interchangeably, but scientifically they have distinct and separate meanings.
And as science often does, our definition of sex has evolved as we have developed a better understanding of genetics. Thus, sex is not a dichotomy, but a fluid continuum.
Race on the other hand, as people have noted, can not be defined genetically, and is regarded in science as a sociological trait...like gender.
I defer to your actual expertise in genetics. My knowledge in that field does not extend much beyond knowing who Mendel was and how to use Punnett Squares!
I am, however, neighbors and friends with a Fred Hutch geneticist who was part of Lee Hartwell's Nobel-winning team.
Since we drink beer together I invoke the Scoop Rule of Competence which states that if one has acquaintance (however slight) with an expert one then shares in the master's skill, proficiency, and accomplishment.
-
I think that is a vocal reactive group that wants everyone to be guilty of something.
Unfortunately, a universality not limited to any one political persuasion.
-
bought my tickets yesterday - if you've not seen him with your local symphony it's well worth whatever the ticket price isnot all old farts are the same - this one loves him some Childish Gambino and that is a fantastic song/video
Big fan and have seen him many times, including once with the Charlotte Philharmonic.
I will say that his shows before he got super-famous - in other words, during his the years of his first couple of Ben Folds Five albums - were longer and better. I went to see him solo at Millennium Park after he got super-famous and his show, frankly, sucked. Not all that uncommon in the biz, unfortunately. Everybody ain't Springsteen!
But I did see Folds after that at The Vic and again in Charlotte with the Philharmonic and both were better ... though not as good as the first couple times I saw him.
I hope he puts on a great show for you.
-
Actually words don't have static meanings, so they haven't "always" been synonyms. The word "gender" was almost primarily about the masculine and feminine forms of nouns in languages rather than having anything to do with biological sex. It didn't primarily become a synonym for sex until the 1900s.
Anyway, here is the current definition according to the Oxford English Dictionary:
"Either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female."
Ok fine, but if many people have defined that word a certain way for 120 years, to change the definition over a year or so, well, there will be many people that still recognize the definition they have held their entire lives.
-
Ok fine, but if many people have defined that word a certain way for 120 years, to change the definition over a year or so, well, there will be many people that still recognize the definition they have held their entire lives.
"A year or so?" Pay attention more.
And yes of course, people will still recognize the definition they have held. Human nature.
-
Pay attention more.
To you? No thanks.
-
To you? No thanks.
Well, if you want to remain ignorant, I guess that's your choice.
-
Well, if you want to remain ignorant, I guess that's your choice.
Oh yeah, you are the light in a darkened world. How could I ever live while ignoring you.
When I said "about a year" it was meant as a figure of speech -- exaggeration for effect , but your hubris didn't allow you to see that when you could make yourself feel smart I guess.
-
Hoe lotta bitch slap, pissin' match goin' on, hey?
-
Oh yeah, you are the light in a darkened world. How could I ever live while ignoring you.
When I said "about a year" it was meant as a figure of speech -- exaggeration for effect , but your hubris didn't allow you to see that when you could make yourself feel smart I guess.
"A figure of speech"...lol...OK guy.
-
"A figure of speech"...lol...OK guy.
over 24k posts-and this one don't count...damn, eyn'a? must have a force-field around your
account...ummm, double eyn'a
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/newyork/man-loses-his-mind-and-threatens-to-call-ice-because-a-couple-of-workers-at-a-deli-were-speaking-spanish-to-a-customer
What is wrong with people?
no kidding-
http://wpde.com/news/local/timmonsville-naacp-president-says-was-racially-profiled-body-cam-video-shows-otherwise
addendum- moultrie's facebook post was deleted and he had no comment
this is the stuff that sets us back-of course we always hear about the legit ones, but how many of similar stories like moultrie's do we NOT hear about? back to the "what is wrong with people" thing though-sad all around when it happens either way, but absolutely no need to fuel the fire. our police are vulnerable enough. how many jobs are there where ya don't know if you will survive the day? i mean percentage- wise as there are no guarantees, but just saying
-
no kidding-
http://wpde.com/news/local/timmonsville-naacp-president-says-was-racially-profiled-body-cam-video-shows-otherwise
addendum- moultrie's facebook post was deleted and he had no comment
this is the stuff that sets us back-of course we always hear about the legit ones, but how many of similar stories like moultrie's do we NOT hear about? back to the "what is wrong with people" thing though-sad all around when it happens either way, but absolutely no need to fuel the fire. our police are vulnerable enough. how many jobs are there where ya don't know if you will survive the day? i mean percentage- wise as there are no guarantees, but just saying
The bolded is in no way accurate.
-
"A figure of speech"...lol...OK guy.
Haha, ok. To me, that isn't worth lying about. And also, even if scoop were my only contact with the outside world, I wouldn't have been able to avoid this conversation.
-
no kidding-
http://wpde.com/news/local/timmonsville-naacp-president-says-was-racially-profiled-body-cam-video-shows-otherwise
addendum- moultrie's facebook post was deleted and he had no comment
this is the stuff that sets us back-of course we always hear about the legit ones, but how many of similar stories like moultrie's do we NOT hear about? back to the "what is wrong with people" thing though-sad all around when it happens either way, but absolutely no need to fuel the fire. our police are vulnerable enough. how many jobs are there where ya don't know if you will survive the day? i mean percentage- wise as there are no guarantees, but just saying
White folks can't catch a break, what with all the fraudulent cries of racism by black folks.
Racism? Please. Blacks have it great here, and they always have.
-
White folks can't catch a break, what with all the fraudulent cries of racism by black folks.
Racism? Please. Blacks have it great here, and they always have.
just saying-these are the cases that set legit cases back. similar to faux rape accusations. if we are to work toward achieving any semblance of "fairness" and work further to diminish disparities, there needs to be just castigation. this sets their opportunities back.
oh, and everyone makes their own bed, even the white folk
-
just saying-these are the cases that set legit cases back. similar to faux rape accusations.
These are the things that white males say to excuse lack of progress. I guess its just easier to blame others than look in the mirror.
-
These are the things that white males say to excuse lack of progress. I guess its just easier to blame others than look in the mirror.
While I do agree people say it as an excuse for lack of progress do you deny that there should be more accountability towards those that make false claims?
-
no kidding-
http://wpde.com/news/local/timmonsville-naacp-president-says-was-racially-profiled-body-cam-video-shows-otherwise
addendum- moultrie's facebook post was deleted and he had no comment
http://wtvr.com/2018/05/07/body-cam-footage-released-after-racism-accusations-go-viral/
Very similar incident in Virginia. Body cams are useful.
-
While I do agree people say it as an excuse for lack of progress do you deny that there should be more accountability towards those that make false claims?
Of course. But real claims vastly outnumber false ones. So people who hang on to every false claim and say "SEE!!!!" really are missing the point.
-
Of course. But real claims vastly outnumber false ones. So people who hang on to every false claim and say "SEE!!!!" really are missing the point.
I have no idea what the ratio of real vs false claims are. The only way to know would be if all cops wore body cams.
-
White privilege at Marquette means that, if you are a white athlete, you don't have to worry about badger fans accusing you of being a thug or criminal.
-
White privilege at Marquette means that, if you are a white athlete, you don't have to worry about badger fans accusing you of being a thug or criminal.
Or worse yet, having attended junior college.
-
Or worse yet, having attended junior college.
Horrors and Zounds!!
-
I am stymied by yet another profound contradiction of contemporary American society: If, as you say, one may choose to identify as being a member of another race why then is half the country outraged when a teenage girl in Utah buys a second hand cheongsam to wear to prom?
Wow!!!!!
162,000,000 people outraged all at once. Has that ever even happened before in the 242 year history of this country?
Any word on how they expressed that outrage? I want to be sure to steer clear of the madmen and madwomen and madchildren.
Surely, this should be in the Daily Dose of Doom thread.
-
These are the things that white males say to excuse lack of progress. I guess its just easier to blame others than look in the mirror.
speak for yourself-i'm just saying that the false claims ruin the cred of the real claims. the people who should be mad at those who are trying to lie and cheat the system to further their cause with the false claims are the real victims themselves.
white males do not claim a "lack of progress" rather, they claim that real racism is ignored from the other side. the minorities claim that they cannot be racist because they are in the minority which is wrong.
you know how all this could be cleaned up? once again, content of the character-treat well meaning people well. those who abide by the law should have nothing to worry about. do good things, treat others with respect. in law enforcement, they are dealing with many criminals who try to ruin it for the others who are trying to live life on life's terms. the bad people try to force the good ones into their lives of crime, demean those who are doing well in school or are "acting white" success in their world is to succumb to the white mans world in their minds-that doesn't come from us. from me anyway. success should be doing the right thing, the good thing
-
speak for yourself-i'm just saying that the false claims ruin the cred of the real claims. the people who should be mad at those who are trying to lie and cheat the system to further their cause with the false claims are the real victims themselves.
white males do not claim a "lack of progress" rather, they claim that real racism is ignored from the other side. the minorities claim that they cannot be racist because they are in the minority which is wrong.
you know how all this could be cleaned up? once again, content of the character-treat well meaning people well. those who abide by the law should have nothing to worry about. do good things, treat others with respect. in law enforcement, they are dealing with many criminals who try to ruin it for the others who are trying to live life on life's terms. the bad people try to force the good ones into their lives of crime, demean those who are doing well in school or are "acting white" success in their world is to succumb to the white mans world in their minds-that doesn't come from us. from me anyway. success should be doing the right thing, the good thing
Man you are just a walking, Fox-bot talking point.
-
::) Oh, boy.
-
speak for yourself-i'm just saying that the false claims ruin the cred of the real claims. the people who should be mad at those who are trying to lie and cheat the system to further their cause with the false claims are the real victims themselves.
white males do not claim a "lack of progress" rather, they claim that real racism is ignored from the other side. the minorities claim that they cannot be racist because they are in the minority which is wrong.
you know how all this could be cleaned up? once again, content of the character-treat well meaning people well. those who abide by the law should have nothing to worry about. do good things, treat others with respect. in law enforcement, they are dealing with many criminals who try to ruin it for the others who are trying to live life on life's terms. the bad people try to force the good ones into their lives of crime, demean those who are doing well in school or are "acting white" success in their world is to succumb to the white mans world in their minds-that doesn't come from us. from me anyway. success should be doing the right thing, the good thing
Solid, simply solid.
-
::) Oh, boy.
Solid, simply solid.
Two replies that pretty much validate my thoughts. Thanks!
-
you know how all this could be cleaned up? once again, content of the character-treat well meaning people well. those who abide by the law should have nothing to worry about. do good things, treat others with respect.
In other words ... "Lock him up! Lock him up!"?
-
Two replies that pretty much validate my thoughts. Thanks!
;)
-
In other words ... "Lock him up! Lock him up!"?
C'mon man. Don't drag Hillary inta dis, hey?
-
rocket
Good stuff.
-
you know how all this could be cleaned up? once again, content of the character-treat well meaning people well.
You realize the whole point of racial discrimination is that people specifically ignore the content of one's character, or make judgments about the content of one's character based on their being black or brown?
Do you really think that slavery and, more currently, Jim Crow are irrelevant now - even though there are generations of people still alive that lived through it (including, possibly, you)? Do you really think those underlying beliefs and institutions don't still exist in American society? And do you really think that, if they do exist, that fact is neither important nor relevant?
Those are not rhetorical questions. I'm genuinely curious, since you seem awfully eager to ignore the reality of the past and present.
-
you know how all this could be cleaned up? once again, content of the character
It never ceases to amaze how many people quote only this part of that speech while being entirely ignorant of - or worse yet, willfully ignoring - nearly everything else King said that day.
-
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/105/122/aa6.gif)
Guys, we should all be proud we made it this far....good luck in the next thread.
-
I'll never understand how progress is used to discourage further action and write off things as fixed. People are always quick and eager to point out how slavery was 150 years ago and how much better things are since, say, the 1960s, as if everything should have worked itself out by now. And any evidence to the contrary is chalked up as everyone should accept more personal responsibility for their station in life.
Its like a cancer patient being treated and after a few rounds of chemo, some of the cancer is receding, improvements are made and instead of continuing treatment, the doctor being like "well, you're no longer cancer ridden, you're basically healthy" and telling the patient its on them to fully beat the cancer and then stay healthy like any non-cancer patient.
-
You realize the whole point of racial discrimination is that people specifically ignore the content of one's character, or make judgments about the content of one's character based on their being black or brown?
Do you really think that slavery and, more currently, Jim Crow are irrelevant now - even though there are generations of people still alive that lived through it (including, possibly, you)? Do you really think those underlying beliefs and institutions don't still exist in American society? And do you really think that, if they do exist, that fact is neither important nor relevant?
Those are not rhetorical questions. I'm genuinely curious, since you seem awfully eager to ignore the reality of the past and present.
Explaining. And use of facts.
You think it will help. Sadly, it won't.
-
When you are a young white millionaire professional athlete, you don't get tased and arrested for parking in handicapped spots at a Walgreen's.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/video-police-using-stun-gun-bucks-sterling-brown-concerns-milwaukees-mayor-164333999.html
-
When you are a young white millionaire professional athlete, you don't get tased and arrested for parking in handicapped spots at a Walgreen's.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/video-police-using-stun-gun-bucks-sterling-brown-concerns-milwaukees-mayor-164333999.html
Will wait for video to make judgment, but the mayor is "concerned."
-
When you are a young white millionaire professional athlete, you don't get tased and arrested for parking in handicapped spots at a Walgreen's.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/video-police-using-stun-gun-bucks-sterling-brown-concerns-milwaukees-mayor-164333999.html
"He had it coming parking in a handicapped spot." - Scoopers who shall remain nameless.
-
When you are a young white millionaire professional athlete, you don't get tased and arrested for parking in handicapped spots at a Walgreen's.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/video-police-using-stun-gun-bucks-sterling-brown-concerns-milwaukees-mayor-164333999.html
All indications are it's going to be pretty damning. Evidence is a good thing - just as they proved law enforcement officers innocent in the examples on the previous page, it's looking as if it will be the other way this time.
This is also why specific examples are useful. It is actionable - both in this instance (discipline/firing) and future policy (hiring/training/deployment). Shouting vague terms about widespread oppression, or the inspiring "everyone, suck it up!" non-solution is why the once productive conversation in this thread is leading to the lock.
-
Nothin' good happens at 2 am, aina?
-
All indications are it's going to be pretty damning. Evidence is a good thing - just as they proved law enforcement officers innocent in the examples on the previous page, it's looking as if it will be the other way this time.
Love me some evidence, be it exculpatory or damning! Way better that the pre-packaged biases preferred by Scoopers from all persuasions.
-
4ever
It took me to about age 45, but I agree, nothing good happens at 2am. I have advised my boys to learn it that far quicker than it took the old man.
-
Nothin' good happens at 2 am, aina?
I took a really good leak this morning at 2 am.
-
4ever
It took me to about age 45, but I agree, nothing good happens at 2am. I have advised my boys to learn it that far quicker than it took the old man.
Food truck tacos
-
Food truck tacos
Point to the bagpiper there.
-
"He had it coming parking in a handicapped spot." - Scoopers who shall remain nameless.
Maybe he was drunk and wearing something provocative.
-
I took a really good leak this morning at 2 am.
[/qu
At yo crib orr on 'gainst a buildin', hey?
-
After an alarm.
-
Will wait for video to make judgment, but the mayor is "concerned."
I think the video will be damning and something should be done but the mayor being concerned is laughable. Dude is an empty suit will just make moral statements without doing anything actually useful. Nice guy and all but the worst kind of politician.....really good at pointing at the fire without any ability to make sure the fire gets put out.
-
Simply a pr move to cater to da constituency. Barrett is a limp penis, hey?
-
When you are a young white millionaire professional athlete, you don't get tased and arrested for parking in handicapped spots at a Walgreen's.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/video-police-using-stun-gun-bucks-sterling-brown-concerns-milwaukees-mayor-164333999.html
Or TAMU. (But he did get a ticket)
-
Food truck tacos
Oyster cracker wars
Arby's Drive thru (share ride)
Donuts
Tombstone pizzas
Lunar eclipse
-
Simply a pr move to cater to da constituency. Barrett is a limp penis, hey?
His constituents like him. Who should he cater too?
-
Didn't hafta say nothin', hey?
-
Didn't hafta say nothin', hey?
Why? To keep you boys up in the Quon happy?
-
Will wait for video to make judgment, but the mayor is "concerned."
I was watching a story on WTMJ 4 yesterday and thought it was very telling that they used this picture for Sterling Brown:
(https://localtvwiti.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/brown3.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&strip=all)
Considering how long ago this was, I would think that a more presentable picture would be appropriate:
(http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/nba/players/full/3057187.png&w=350&h=254)
They are definitely helping to shape the narrative with their image choice.
-
I was watching a story on WTMJ 4 yesterday and thought it was very telling that they used this picture for Sterling Brown:
(https://localtvwiti.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/brown3.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&strip=all)
Considering how long ago this was, I would think that a more presentable picture would be appropriate:
(http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/nba/players/full/3057187.png&w=350&h=254)
They are definitely helping to shape the narrative with their image choice.
One more example of pure racism - gotta make him look like a derelict or drug dealer.
An offshoot of the "bad is black" effect where magazines will darken photos of black men because we see darker as more evil.
The OJ cover on Time Magazine (maybe it was Newsweek) is the most famous example. They intentionally darkened his skin so we would all know that black is evil. IFIC, they issued an apology for the cover.
In all fairness, though, cops get off on releasing nasty pics of any celebrity - see Nick Nolte, Gary Busey, or Lindsay Lohan to name just a few.
-
Why? To keep you boys up in the Quon happy?
Gonna take a peak outta my ivory tower ta cee if its safe ta come out, hey?
-
I don't have a problem with using the arresting mug shot as the picture the media uses.
The police weren't dealing with clean cut, possibly make-uped Bucks' uniformed photo shoot guy. They were dealing with the guy in the mug shot.
Does it "shape a narrative"? Or does it journalize what happened at 2am Friday night? -- The answer to that likely depends on your frame of mind.
-
I was watching a story on WTMJ 4 yesterday and thought it was very telling that they used this picture for Sterling Brown:
(https://localtvwiti.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/brown3.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&strip=all)
Considering how long ago this was, I would think that a more presentable picture would be appropriate:
(http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/nba/players/full/3057187.png&w=350&h=254)
They are definitely helping to shape the narrative with their image choice.
That's his mugshot photo, standard for news organizations to do this. Look at the mugshot of the killer down in Houston that shot the school last week. I suppose they could have run his class picture instead where he is smiling and handsome, but that's not what news orgs do. Should they? Should they be required to show a good picture and a bad picture?
The media has tremendous power to influence emotions one way or the other by what photos they choose. In the Trayvon Martin situation the media was widely panned for using a photo of him as a 12 year old when he was 17 at his death. The questions became why they would show a person's photo so out of scope with their present age, especially the difference in size and maturity.
Take a look at Tiger Woods mugshot , Nick Nolte, Nick Carter, Justin Bieber. The range is endless because of the state they are in, time of day, if they smile vs not smiling, but to your point the media can create an image if they wish. My question is whether in this case they did, or did the simply use a mug shot as most news organizations do?
-
In all fairness, though, cops get off on releasing nasty pics of any celebrity - see Nick Nolte, Gary Busey, or Lindsay Lohan to name just a few.
Or arrests are made, TV news deems the arrest newsworthy, TV news stations request mug shot, and then police release the mug shot, which is aired by TV news while reporting the arrest.
-
White folks can't catch a break, what with all the fraudulent cries of racism by black folks.
Racism? Please. Blacks have it great here, and they always have.
Why cannot it not be both? If body cameras catch police or others committing racist acts, that is a good thing so we can stop it. If same cameras are capturing supposed victims also acting in racist rants or condemning police is that also not a good thing? Why cannot it not be both?
If it catches fraudulent claims, great. If it catches fraudulent actions, great. I'm not aware of anyone saying one group cannot catch a break or another group has had it worse, isn't the point to decide what the truth is and the cameras are tool to determine that?
-
One more example of pure racism - gotta make him look like a derelict or drug dealer.
An offshoot of the "bad is black" effect where magazines will darken photos of black men because we see darker as more evil.
The OJ cover on Time Magazine (maybe it was Newsweek) is the most famous example. They intentionally darkened his skin so we would all know that black is evil. IFIC, they issued an apology for the cover.
In all fairness, though, cops get off on releasing nasty pics of any celebrity - see Nick Nolte, Gary Busey, or Lindsay Lohan to name just a few.
ahem...
-
You realize the whole point of racial discrimination is that people specifically ignore the content of one's character, or make judgments about the content of one's character based on their being black or brown?
Do you really think that slavery and, more currently, Jim Crow are irrelevant now - even though there are generations of people still alive that lived through it (including, possibly, you)? Do you really think those underlying beliefs and institutions don't still exist in American society? And do you really think that, if they do exist, that fact is neither important nor relevant?
Those are not rhetorical questions. I'm genuinely curious, since you seem awfully eager to ignore the reality of the past and present.
i understand completely that racism, sadly, still exists. what i am trying to persuade is that it is how one behaves them self, or not, should be the barometer.
-
Why cannot it not be both? If body cameras catch police or others committing racist acts, that is a good thing so we can stop it. If same cameras are capturing supposed victims also acting in racist rants or condemning police is that also not a good thing? Why cannot it not be both?
If it catches fraudulent claims, great. If it catches fraudulent actions, great. I'm not aware of anyone saying one group cannot catch a break or another group has had it worse, isn't the point to decide what the truth is and the cameras are tool to determine that?
Rough to be white in America today. Why, somebody might spell your name wrong on your Starbucks cup ... or wish you Happy Holidays instead of Merry Xmas!
-
Or arrests are made, TV news deems the arrest newsworthy, TV news stations request mug shot, and then police release the mug shot, which is aired by TV news while reporting the arrest.
Please, enough of this even handedness. America has slavery, Jim Crow, etc., as part of her history. Therefore the use of mug shots in stories surrounding the arrests of black suspects is a blatant act of racism. It's in chapter one of "Logic I Never Took" by Brandie. It's a real page turner.
-
Rough to be white in America today. Why, somebody might spell your name wrong on your Starbucks cup ... or wish you Happy Holidays instead of Merry Xmas!
Hell, they might even put "Panther Pride" ornaments on your tree. So much legit outrage, so little time...
-
Hell, they might even put "Panther Pride" ornaments on your tree. So much legit outrage, so little time...
Oh, I was "outraged"! I screamed, "If you ever step foot in my yard again, I will shoot to kill!! North Carolina is a 'stand your ground' state, you know!!!"
-
Please, enough of this even handedness. America has slavery, Jim Crow, etc., as part of her history. Therefore the use of mug shots in stories surrounding the arrests of black suspects is a blatant act of racism. It's in chapter one of "Logic I Never Took" by Brandie. It's a real page turner.
Maybe read my entire post before jerking your knee.
-
Maybe read my entire post before jerking your knee.
I did read it. Without evidence, you insist that the cops "get off" on releasing nasty pictures of celebrities (they have no choice about releasing them - it's the media that demands them and publishes them). Patting yourself on the back ("in all fairness") for the addendum to your original statement (never retracted) that the picture is "one more example of pure racism" doesn't change that. I think you're the one who knee jerked, Brandie. Then tried (half heartedly IMHO) to walk it back a little.
-
i understand completely that racism, sadly, still exists. what i am trying to persuade is that it is how one behaves them self, or not, should be the barometer.
I completely agree. And that's precisely what black folks are asking for too.
-
I did read it. Without evidence, you insist that the cops "get off" on releasing nasty pictures of celebrities (they have no choice about releasing them - it's the media that demands them and publishes them). Patting yourself on the back ("in all fairness") for the addendum to your original statement (never retracted) that the picture is "one more example of pure racism" doesn't change that. I think you're the one who knee jerked, Brandie. Then tried (half heartedly IMHO) to walk it back a little.
Exactly. This isn't an example of racism or white privilege. Mugshots can be accessed by the public and are used pretty much universally by media outlets when reporting arrests.
-
That's his mugshot photo, standard for news organizations to do this. Look at the mugshot of the killer down in Houston that shot the school last week. I suppose they could have run his class picture instead where he is smiling and handsome, but that's not what news orgs do. Should they? Should they be required to show a good picture and a bad picture?
The media has tremendous power to influence emotions one way or the other by what photos they choose. In the Trayvon Martin situation the media was widely panned for using a photo of him as a 12 year old when he was 17 at his death. The questions became why they would show a person's photo so out of scope with their present age, especially the difference in size and maturity.
Take a look at Tiger Woods mugshot , Nick Nolte, Nick Carter, Justin Bieber. The range is endless because of the state they are in, time of day, if they smile vs not smiling, but to your point the media can create an image if they wish. My question is whether in this case they did, or did the simply use a mug shot as most news organizations do?
There is a nuance to this story though that I think makes it unacceptable. The story is about two things.
1. The wrongful arrest and electrocution of an unarmed black male.
2. The fact that the individual was actually a local professional basketball player.
The story then could require one of two different pictures. 1) The mugshot. 2) His basketball photo.
Given that he was a victim who was wrongfully attacked and arrested, the first seems inappropriate. The second accurately frames him as an individual and is relevant to the story. That is why most media used a basketball photo and not the mugshot in the story.
Using the mugshot reeks of racism and an attempt to frame the story as him being a punk. It enhances the already illegal, racist and public humiliation he had to endure. Frankly, it is absurd.
Now in other cases, where a famous person was arrested on legitimate grounds, for crimes they committed, a mugshot, even if embarrasing, is both relevant and appropriate for the media to use. That is not the case here.
-
Here's hopin' da released video provides audio content from da initial contact wit Brown as well, hey?
-
Here's hopin' da released video provides audio content from da initial contact wit Brown as well, hey?
Why? Unless Brown issued a threat, which has not been alleged to my knowledge, I don't know why that would make a difference.
-
There is a nuance to this story though that I think makes it unacceptable. The story is about two things.
1. The wrongful arrest and electrocution of an unarmed black male.
2. The fact that the individual was actually a local professional basketball player.
The story then could require one of two different pictures. 1) The mugshot. 2) His basketball photo.
Given that he was a victim who was wrongfully attacked and arrested, the first seems inappropriate. The second accurately frames him as an individual and is relevant to the story. That is why most media used a basketball photo and not the mugshot in the story.
Using the mugshot reeks of racism and an attempt to frame the story as him being a punk. It enhances the already illegal, racist and public humiliation he had to endure. Frankly, it is absurd.
Now in other cases, where a famous person was arrested on legitimate grounds, for crimes they committed, a mugshot, even if embarrasing, is both relevant and appropriate for the media to use. That is not the case here.
This seems reasonable.
-
The reason I take issue with the mugshot is that this is not reporting the arrest. The arrest was in January. In January/February, sure, it's just reporting. When you're talking about an incident that sounds very much like inappropriate action by police and that Brown was the victim, continuing to use that pic 4 months later is shaping the narrative. That's no longer a subconscious decision or one made simply using the tools available to you, that's choosing to paint the victim in the most negative light. Further, he likely looks like that because he just got tased, so his victimization is now being used to make him look worse.
I've spent nights combing through B-roll. I've sat on the internet finding pictures to use for news stories. We're well beyond the point of "just use the arrest photo."
-
Why? Unless Brown issued a threat, which has not been alleged to my knowledge, I don't know why that would make a difference.
Is it of interest to you that Brown, supposedly, was parked in a manner that took up 2 handicapped parking spots without a permit? Audio and video will tell the entire story. Are you kidding? Its all relevant.
-
Is it of interest to you that Brown, supposedly, was parked in a manner that took up 2 handicapped parking spots without a permit? Audio and video will tell the entire story. Are you kidding? Its all relevant.
Can't speak for Sultan, but responding for myself: not even remotely. That's a ticket, not a tasering. What will be of interest to me is how he interacted with the police. Plenty of people who would seem to have an interest in suggesting Brown acted inappropriately are suggesting just the opposite.
-
Is it of interest to you that Brown, supposedly, was parked in a manner that took up 2 handicapped parking spots without a permit? Audio and video will tell the entire story. Are you kidding? Its all relevant.
taser personalis
-
White privilege means that parking in handicap parking spots without a permit doesn't mean getting tased and arrested.. At most a ticket.
-
How he interacted with the police is the essence of whether the use of a taser is justified. Therefore, the audio is clearly an important part of the video.
-
The reason I take issue with the mugshot is that this is not reporting the arrest. The arrest was in January. In January/February, sure, it's just reporting. When you're talking about an incident that sounds very much like inappropriate action by police and that Brown was the victim, continuing to use that pic 4 months later is shaping the narrative. That's no longer a subconscious decision or one made simply using the tools available to you, that's choosing to paint the victim in the most negative light. Further, he likely looks like that because he just got tased, so his victimization is now being used to make him look worse.
I've spent nights combing through B-roll. I've sat on the internet finding pictures to use for news stories. We're well beyond the point of "just use the arrest photo."
OK, I get that as well. I didn't know they were still using it.
-
Is it of interest to you that Brown, supposedly, was parked in a manner that took up 2 handicapped parking spots without a permit? Audio and video will tell the entire story. Are you kidding? Its all relevant.
So if he said mean things to the police, he deserves to get tased?
-
In 1981 James Schoemperlen, urinated in public after a Brewer's game. Should have resulted in a ticket, right? Not if you resist and are verbally obstinate. We have all progressed as a society, I think, since 1981, but google this incident and view the pictures. Thinking Schoemperlen didn't feel privileged that day.
-
So if he said mean things to the police, he deserves to get tased?
That's why the audio is so important. Let's say for argument sake, Brown was spotted in Walgreens parking lot at 2 am illegally parked taking up 2 handicapped spots. Police approach him and ask for his driver's license, run a check, and come back with a citation. Is that justified? Few can argue otherwise. In the worst case scenerio, Brown pays the fine and the incident isn't newsworthy.
However, the video and audio will give all of us an insight as to what actually happened and whether or not the police actions were excessive. I'm open minded, but will reserve justment until actually viewing and hearing the tape.
-
The Schoemperlen case was over the top. I remember vividly how outraged by Dad was over that beating. My Dad was a pro cop guy, but he was over the top hot over the treatment to Schoemperlen.
As for the Brown deal, I always hold out judgement until the video/audio are released. While I am also big pro cop, when they cross the line I believe they deserve any punishment they get. Tough job, but have to play within the rules.
-
I trust that somebody will post the video when it's released for us all to see and then make judgments.
I also trust that somebody will find out who kidnapped 4ever.
-
Why? Unless Brown issued a threat, which has not been alleged to my knowledge, I don't know why that would make a difference.
Cuz we have to have something that shows the black guy was at fault :-\
-
The Schoemperlen case was over the top. I remember vividly how outraged by Dad was over that beating. My Dad was a pro cop guy, but he was over the top hot over the treatment to Schoemperlen.
As for the Brown deal, I always hold out judgement until the video/audio are released. While I am also big pro cop, when they cross the line I believe they deserve any punishment they get. Tough job, but have to play within the rules.
+1. And I'd add this is why the more video, audio and data we can get the better. We don't do anyone, either the cops or the communities they police, a favor by making decisions about laws, regulations and relationships with less than complete data.
-
How he interacted with the police is the essence of whether the use of a taser is justified. Therefore, the audio is clearly an important part of the video.
Nope.
In fact, the Milwaukee Police Department's policy for use of Tasers says just the opposite.
G. The ECD shall not be used when it is reasonable to believe that incapacitation of the subject may result in serious injury or death:
1. In proximity to flammable liquids, fumes, gases, blasting materials, or any other highly combustible materials that may be ignited by use of the device, including, but not limited to, any subject who may have been contaminated with combustible liquids.
Note: Some areas within hospitals have oxygen or other flammable gases or substances in use. Officers need to be aware of this when deciding whether to use an ECD.
2. When it is reasonable to believe that incapacitation of the subject may result in serious injury or death.
3. Near roofs or the edge of buildings, to eliminate the possibility of the subject falling and sustaining serious injury or death.
4. Punitively for purposes of coercion, or in an unjustified manner.
5. To escort or prod subjects.
6. To awaken unconscious or intoxicated individuals.
7. Against subjects who are offering only passive and/or verbal resistance.
http://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/mpdAuthors/SOP/467-ELECTRONICCONTROLDEVICE1.pdf
-
Cuz we have to have something that shows the black guy was at fault :-\
No, cuz the more informed our judgements are the better they tend to be
#No More Knee Jerks
-
Nope.
In fact, the Milwaukee Police Department's policy for use of Tasers says just the opposite.
G. The ECD shall not be used when it is reasonable to believe that incapacitation of the subject may result in serious injury or death:
1. In proximity to flammable liquids, fumes, gases, blasting materials, or any other highly combustible materials that may be ignited by use of the device, including, but not limited to, any subject who may have been contaminated with combustible liquids.
Note: Some areas within hospitals have oxygen or other flammable gases or substances in use. Officers need to be aware of this when deciding whether to use an ECD.
2. When it is reasonable to believe that incapacitation of the subject may result in serious injury or death.
3. Near roofs or the edge of buildings, to eliminate the possibility of the subject falling and sustaining serious injury or death.
4. Punitively for purposes of coercion, or in an unjustified manner.
5. To escort or prod subjects.
6. To awaken unconscious or intoxicated individuals.
7. Against subjects who are offering only passive and/or verbal resistance.
http://city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/mpdAuthors/SOP/467-ELECTRONICCONTROLDEVICE1.pdf
Great, so the video and audio should show whether Brown resisted aggressively or offered more than verbal resistance, right?
-
Great, so the video and audio should show whether Brown resisted aggressively or offered more than verbal resistance, right?
Why would audio matter if verbal resistance is irrelevant?
-
Exactly. This isn't an example of racism or white privilege. Mugshots can be accessed by the public and are used pretty much universally by media outlets when reporting arrests.
This mugshot was used long after the incident occurred. Also, I wonder what someone is supposed to look like after being assaulted by police.
-
Why would audio matter if verbal resistance is irrelevant?
Calling someone a mf'in' pig is a lot different than a suspect saying "I object to you citing me today, sir."
-
Calling someone a mf'in' pig is a lot different than a suspect saying "I object to you citing me today, sir."
Not according to the policy. Are you seriously suggesting that someone calling the cop a "mf'ing pig" is a tasable offense?
-
Calling someone a mf'in' pig is a lot different than a suspect saying "I object to you citing me today, sir."
I think you should raise this with the city of Milwaukee, since their policy says it's no different at all when it comes to use of force. There's no "he hurt my feels with mean words" exception.
-
Calling someone a mf'in' pig is a lot different than a suspect saying "I object to you citing me today, sir."
I'm also gonna go on a limb and suggest that Brown, who is the son of a police officer himself, probably wouldn't call one a "Mf'ing pig".
At least my hypothetical leap is grounded in a published fact.
-
Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=476&v=oPSpmk7S4eg
The first 8 minutes are a bunch of talking, can't really hear the video.
He's surrounded by 5-6 cops.
Relevant bits .. 8:10 cop commands "take your hands out of your pockets now!" .. it appears one cop then comes from behind and perhaps tries to yank his hands out of his pockets .. Brown resists this move, and all cops converge upon him wrestling him down. 22 seconds of struggling and the taser is fired.
I'm sure everyone will see exactly what they want to see in this video.
-
Why would audio matter if verbal resistance is irrelevant?
audio absolutely matters-
you're are going along the lines of "rules are rules". what if the audio provided over the top threatening verbiage that could indicate an imminent threat? what if while brown was resisting, spittal was splattering the cop(s)? to gather as much evidence as one can could be the difference between exonerating the cops and a multi-gazillion$$ lawsuit
-
From what I saw, overkill by the cops. Tough job, but not sure this situation merited the police presence or actions. That said, one thing I have always done, whatever a cop tells me to do, I do it.
-
Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=476&v=oPSpmk7S4eg
The first 8 minutes are a bunch of talking, can't really hear the video.
He's surrounded by 5-6 cops.
Relevant bits .. 8:10 cop commands "take your hands out of your pockets now!" .. it appears one cop then comes from behind and perhaps tries to yank his hands out of his pockets .. Brown resists this move, and all cops converge upon him wrestling him down. 22 seconds of struggling and the taser is fired.
I'm sure everyone will see exactly what they want to see in this video.
gee, whatever happened to just doing what authority tells ya to do? if you do that, and bad chit still happens, it will be shown on the camera just like those showing the people lying about their interactions with the police-the truth will come out.
-
gee, whatever happened to just doing what authority tells ya to do? if you do that, and bad chit still happens, it will be shown on the camera just like those showing the people lying about their interactions with the police-the truth will come out.
We don't live in a literal police state, the "just comply and nothing bad while happen" thought is a real bad take
-
gee, whatever happened to just doing what authority tells ya to do? if you do that, and bad chit still happens, it will be shown on the camera just like those showing the people lying about their interactions with the police-the truth will come out.
He backed up, not as much as the cop would've liked but he did back up, cop didn't have the right to push him.
When was the last time they immediately called for backup when talking to you? That's over the top from the get go
he had his hands in his pockets for 8min before they started screaming at him. I'd be confused to
-
Would love to see some of the responses the bucks and Wojo are gonna get when recruiting the next few months
-
He backed up, not as much as the cop would've liked but he did back up, cop didn't have the right to push him.
When was the last time they immediately called for backup when talking to you? That's over the top from the get go
he had his hands in his pockets for 8min before they started screaming at him. I'd be confused to
Not to mention the context of black man surrounded by cops in the middle of the night. Brown almost had to be the one to de-escalate which is a terrible spot to put a citizen in. Should be significant consequences for the officers there.
-
Cops were dead wrong.
I look forward to seeing how they are censured/punished for this egregious violation of a citizen's rights and the unnecessary escalation of violence.
-
gee, whatever happened to just doing what authority tells ya to do? if you do that, and bad chit still happens, it will be shown on the camera just like those showing the people lying about their interactions with the police-the truth will come out.
that worked out well for Philando Castile, didn't it?
-
We don't live in a literal police state, the "just comply and nothing bad while happen" thought is a real bad take
Totally agree. People forget the cops work law abiding citizens as they are to serve and protect us - not harass, taser and kill.
This cop was a tough guy. He went in looking for a problem. He came in very confrontational. F that dude. Hopefully he gets canned. He needs anger management. I mean this is a freaking parking ticket and this cop had to go all f'ing hero. What a jagbag. He should get tazed in the nuts. He also lies right at 4:30 saying he got right into it with him. Lies from that hero cop to all his buddies. No wonder he gets the pack all riled up. And whomever fired the taser should charged with felony aggravated battery and be put in prison. F* this. Every cop there should be fired and charged as an accessory too. They all escalated the problem. Every f'ing one of them.
Why couldn't the cop just write the ticket and move on. F'ing hero complex. Hope he gets nasty Nate as a bunkmate in Waupan.
-
gee, whatever happened to just doing what authority tells ya to do? if you do that, and bad chit still happens, it will be shown on the camera just like those showing the people lying about their interactions with the police-the truth will come out.
rocket, seriously ... I don't know you but we have had enough exchanges for me to think you're basically a good guy, as well as one who calls himself Christian. Is it really that difficult for you to put yourself in another man's shoes, even if that guy is a man of color? Do you really have so much trouble thinking about what it must have been like to be Brown in this situation? Wow.
-
Totally agree. People forget the cops work law abiding citizens as they are to serve and protect us - not harass, taser and kill.
This cop was a tough guy. He went in looking for a problem. He came in very confrontational. F that dude. Hopefully he gets canned. He needs anger management. I mean this is a freaking parking ticket and this cop had to go all f'ing hero. What a jagbag. He should get tazed in the nuts. He also lies right at 4:30 saying he got right into it with him. Lies from that hero cop to all his buddies. No wonder he gets the pack all riled up. And whomever fired the taser should charged with felony aggravated battery and be put in prison. F* this. Every cop there should be fired and charged as an accessory too. They all escalated the problem. Every f'ing one of them.
Why couldn't the cop just write the ticket and move on. F'ing hero complex. Hope he gets nasty Nate as a bunkmate in Waupan.
Yeah, but if Brown has a friend on the Packers and that player takes a knee during the anthem to protest this, the Packers will get fined. So at least our democratic republic is safe from tyranny!
That's me, always trying to find gold under the rainbow.
-
Wow! You knew it was gonna be bad when the cops had to put out a PR video about how much they like black people.
And still people here (mainly the same guy who always thinks it's the black guys fault) blame Brown.
Every cop involved should be fired today and charged with criminal assault tomorrow.
But we know the drill. Just as higher ups allowed priests to rape children over and over again, the powers that be in police departments have continued to endorse this behavior for hundreds of years.
Cops, priests, presidents....... as long as people support the criminals, it will never end. The poor and minorities will continue to share the blame.
-
Totally agree. People forget the cops work law abiding citizens as they are to serve and protect us - not harass, taser and kill.
This cop was a tough guy. He went in looking for a problem. He came in very confrontational. F that dude. Hopefully he gets canned. He needs anger management. I mean this is a freaking parking ticket and this cop had to go all f'ing hero. What a jagbag. He should get tazed in the nuts. He also lies right at 4:30 saying he got right into it with him. Lies from that hero cop to all his buddies. No wonder he gets the pack all riled up. And whomever fired the taser should charged with felony aggravated battery and be put in prison. F* this. Every cop there should be fired and charged as an accessory too. They all escalated the problem. Every f'ing one of them.
Why couldn't the cop just write the ticket and move on. F'ing hero complex. Hope he gets nasty Nate as a bunkmate in Waupan.
Every cop at the scene who did nothing to stop the abuse should be fired and fully prosecuted. Let's not blame this on one bad cop, but rather a gang of thugs who all themselves "police".
-
gee, whatever happened to just doing what authority tells ya to do? if you do that, and bad chit still happens, it will be shown on the camera just like those showing the people lying about their interactions with the police-the truth will come out.
God. Yet another one who thinks non compliance is a taserable offense.
Typical people lining up in favor of a police state.
-
God. Yet another one who thinks non compliance is a taserable offense.
Typical people lining up in favor of a police state.
I don't think rocketsurgeon is "that guy", but I do know a Wayne LaPierre fan who is crying "police state" every time a municipality enacts a restrictive gun ordinance. This same friend of mine always ends up on the "taze the disobedient MFer" side.
-
rocket, seriously ... I don't know you but we have had enough exchanges for me to think you're basically a good guy, as well as one who calls himself Christian. Is it really that difficult for you to put yourself in another man's shoes, even if that guy is a man of color? Do you really have so much trouble thinking about what it must have been like to be Brown in this situation? Wow.
i am a pretty good guy :) all i'm trying to do is provide a little balance-did the cops act over-zealously? perhaps. could brown have done anything differently? perhaps. in order to make the best analysis of the whole thing, maybe mr. brown could do a little more explaining of what he was doing. you guys are attacking me because i'm not dry humpin all your legs in full agreement here.
i merely said that the audio does matter as it could give us more understanding as to why either party acted as they did. i merely stated that if one were to listen to an authority's orders, a different outcome could have occurred.
that's it
so, for someone to make those 2 observations/suggestions, whatever and have their character questioned is one of the problems with this board. any little stray from what appears to be the "status quo" ...
i can reasonably understand how many could come to the conclusion that the police over-reacted. yes, i am very pro-cop and i respect the hell out of what they do, but i think it would be nice to hear a little more from mr. brown as well. it just seems many here are quick to lean toward the victim.
all in all, i think this goes about 60% cops heavy handed, 40% mr. brown could've cooperated a little more
on another note, i heard that sterling played later that evening and put up an electrifying performance :D
-
God. Yet another one who thinks non compliance is a taserable offense.
Typical people lining up in favor of a police state.
He thinks black skin is a taserable offense.
-
God. Yet another one who thinks non compliance is a taserable offense.
Typical people lining up in favor of a police state.
nice try with the dog whistle-which logic classes did you take. if that's what you got out of my posts sully, you've got an electrolyte imbalance or something...i'll go with something though
-
nice try with the dog whistle-which logic classes did you take. if that's what you got out of my posts sully, you've got an electrolyte imbalance or something...i'll go with something though
Bullsh*t. Anyone who thinks that incident was 40% on Brown basically is a police state advocate.
-
https://www.nba.com/bucks/news/bucks-organization-statement-sterling-brown
Bucks statement. Very nice.
-
Totally agree. People forget the cops work law abiding citizens as they are to serve and protect us - not harass, taser and kill.
This cop was a tough guy. He went in looking for a problem. He came in very confrontational. F that dude. Hopefully he gets canned. He needs anger management. I mean this is a freaking parking ticket and this cop had to go all f'ing hero. What a jagbag. He should get tazed in the nuts. He also lies right at 4:30 saying he got right into it with him. Lies from that hero cop to all his buddies. No wonder he gets the pack all riled up. And whomever fired the taser should charged with felony aggravated battery and be put in prison. F* this. Every cop there should be fired and charged as an accessory too. They all escalated the problem. Every f'ing one of them.
Why couldn't the cop just write the ticket and move on. F'ing hero complex. Hope he gets nasty Nate as a bunkmate in Waupan.
That's how I see it. The cop was looking to escalate from the beginning.
-
Good for the Bucks. Excellent statement.
rocket, respectfully, this is how a person who cares about his fellow man should react.
Those cops were common thugs. Period.
-
God. Yet another one who thinks non compliance is a taserable offense.
Typical people lining up in favor of a police state.
I hope that's not what rocket (or any Scooper) thinks.
Look, I'm an old white guy who grew up very much afraid of the police. Most are good people, but some bad and some erratic people slip through the cracks Bad or erratic people with badges and guns scare the spit out of me so I never took any chances - totally compliant, yes sir, no sir even if the cop was a complete dick. So I agree that the "smart" choice is total compliance. But you don't tase or shoot people because they don't chose the "smartest" behavior. Any cop who chooses unnecessary force in this type of situation is bad or erratic and should lose his badge. Period.
-
i am a pretty good guy :) all i'm trying to do is provide a little balance-did the cops act over-zealously? perhaps. could brown have done anything differently? perhaps. in order to make the best analysis of the whole thing, maybe mr. brown could do a little more explaining of what he was doing. you guys are attacking me because i'm not dry humpin all your legs in full agreement here.
i merely said that the audio does matter as it could give us more understanding as to why either party acted as they did. i merely stated that if one were to listen to an authority's orders, a different outcome could have occurred.
that's it
so, for someone to make those 2 observations/suggestions, whatever and have their character questioned is one of the problems with this board. any little stray from what appears to be the "status quo" ...
i can reasonably understand how many could come to the conclusion that the police over-reacted. yes, i am very pro-cop and i respect the hell out of what they do, but i think it would be nice to hear a little more from mr. brown as well. it just seems many here are quick to lean toward the victim.
all in all, i think this goes about 60% cops heavy handed, 40% mr. brown could've cooperated a little more
on another note, i heard that sterling played later that evening and put up an electrifying performance :D
My only response to this is that it's the JOB of the police to not be over zealous. That is their whole reason for being. Mr. Brown, as a citizen, has no responsibility in this situation to de-escalate this situation. Police have an unfathomably hard job in this day and age. But that is part of putting on the uniform.
-
Agreed. Excellent statement by the Bucks. Sterling also put one out that I generally agree with and I appreciate his calling for calm dialogue.
-
I hope that's not what rocket (or any Scooper) thinks.
Look, I'm an old white guy who grew up very much afraid of the police. Most are good people, but some bad and some erratic people slip through the cracks Bad or erratic people with badges and guns scare the spit out of me so I never took any chances - totally compliant, yes sir, no sir even if the cop was a complete dick. So I agree that the "smart" choice is total compliance. But you don't tase or shoot people because they don't chose the "smartest" behavior. Any cop who chooses unnecessary force in this type of situation is bad or erratic and should lose his badge. Period.
well stated lenny
rest assured as sully is wrong once again, with his assumption that i believe what sterling brown did was a taserable offense.
-
There is a nuance to this story though that I think makes it unacceptable. The story is about two things.
1. The wrongful arrest and electrocution of an unarmed black male.
2. The fact that the individual was actually a local professional basketball player.
The story then could require one of two different pictures. 1) The mugshot. 2) His basketball photo.
Given that he was a victim who was wrongfully attacked and arrested, the first seems inappropriate. The second accurately frames him as an individual and is relevant to the story. That is why most media used a basketball photo and not the mugshot in the story.
Using the mugshot reeks of racism and an attempt to frame the story as him being a punk. It enhances the already illegal, racist and public humiliation he had to endure. Frankly, it is absurd.
Now in other cases, where a famous person was arrested on legitimate grounds, for crimes they committed, a mugshot, even if embarrasing, is both relevant and appropriate for the media to use. That is not the case here.
Do we know anything about the producer of the news show? Gender, race, age, etc? I've read a few comments here to suggest this was done intentionally with a racist intent, but how does anyone know this? My understanding is mug shots are often used. As I asked the other day, should a nice class picture have been used of the kid that shot those poor kids in Texas? What are the rules here?
Did TMJ manipulate the picture in any way? It is a picture of Mr. Brown, yes? Did they also run a Bucks picture, too? I was told they did.
Dangerous to determine intent and I'm not saying you are, but there were a few comments by others here that sure had landed on the newscast doing this with racist intentions which is wrong in my view. Unless there is factual data to support that, it's a charge that is unnecessary.
-
The reason I take issue with the mugshot is that this is not reporting the arrest. The arrest was in January. In January/February, sure, it's just reporting. When you're talking about an incident that sounds very much like inappropriate action by police and that Brown was the victim, continuing to use that pic 4 months later is shaping the narrative. That's no longer a subconscious decision or one made simply using the tools available to you, that's choosing to paint the victim in the most negative light. Further, he likely looks like that because he just got tased, so his victimization is now being used to make him look worse.
I've spent nights combing through B-roll. I've sat on the internet finding pictures to use for news stories. We're well beyond the point of "just use the arrest photo."
But isn't the report about what happened the night of the arrest? His appearance, state of mind, etc would not be something that people might want to know? The mugshot is tied to that time frame. There's a reason why some mugshots the person looks wasted (Tiger Woods) vs at a Sunday church service. It may or may not matter, but the photo is tied to the timing of the event in my opinion.
-
I remember this dude from last year. He was hulk or something. Three tasers, batons, it was like cotton balls on him. Finally he went down in Jacksonville.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4263285/cops-repeatedly-taser-drunk-man-and-beat-him-with-baton-in-shocking-arrest-after-he-walked-out-without-paying-his-182-bar-tab/
-
Cops were dead wrong.
I look forward to seeing how they are censured/punished for this egregious violation of a citizen's rights and the unnecessary escalation of violence.
Police have an extremely difficult job, but I could not agree with you more after watching the video. These guys seem to think they are deployed in a military raid....but is that any surprise given the militarized direction our "police" have taken since the "Patriot" Act and other breaches on civil liberties?
My first reaction upon watching the start of the video was, "'C'mon, Sterling, you should know better than parking like that". But, I immediately recognized the barren winter parking lot and time of day and gave him a pass. Any sentient cop could immediately see he truly knew he was going to be "in and out" within 2 minutes. Doesn't excuse the violation, but Brown seemed ready to admit fault before Wyatt Earp took his Alpha shtick overboard. His keystone cronies further needlessly escalated the situation. Usually, when back-up is called, a cooler head in the group prevails and calms down all parties. My father was a police chief and police magistrate before his political career, and he would be rolling over in his grave if his officers behaved in this hot-headed manner.
-
well stated lenny
rest assured as sully is wrong once again, with his assumption that i believe what sterling brown did was a taserable offense.
Then it’s ZERO percent on Brown. Not 40.
-
Then it’s ZERO percent on Brown. Not 40.
I would go 10 Brown, 90 police. Clearly they overstepped. The only reason I give 10 to Brown is that he is asked to remove his hands from his pockets, I assume because they are worried he has something dangerous or illegal. His response is "Leave me alone," Brown appears to say. "I've got stuff in my hands." That should not be a taserable offense, but I don't know what the training for the police are there. Seems excessive unless he made a sudden movement or something.
Brown will win his lawsuit. MPD officers will be in trouble, to what degree unknown. I was raised as Goose was, police tell you to do something you do it, do it politely and with a yes sir or yes maam all at the same time.
-
I seriously do not believe the heat that rocket gets on here. Some of you, even the older posters, try and pick out things out of every post and bash his comments. I really do not understand the need to cherry pick words out of post and run with it.
I would hope that everyone would agree the cops were over aggressive and that should be outed. But, if Brown was my son, I would have choice words for him on how he handled the situation. Cops were wrong, but Brown lacked the respect that I believe police deserve.
-
Just watched the video (what's this, the 4th example of body cam footage revealing the truth in the past two weeks?). Found it very disgusting. I'll put a flat 0% on Brown. Not sure how someone is supposed to act "better" when surrounded by five officers acting with that peculiar level of intimidation. He didn't appear unstable in any way to suggest there was a gun in his pocket and he was going to pull it in front of five cops.
It's the middle of January, it's 2 am, and you're confronting him over using a handicapped spot? How does that require any more than one officer telling him "I know the lot is empty, but don't use the handicapped spots"? Couldn't tell clearly from the video, but if the parking job was particularly poor, perhaps observe his gait on the way out and follow for a couple blocks to rule out drunkenness.
-
I seriously do not believe the heat that rocket gets on here. Some of you, even the older posters, try and pick out things out of every post and bash his comments. I really do not understand the need to cherry pick words out of post and run with it.
I would hope that everyone would agree the cops were over aggressive and that should be outed. But, if Brown was my son, I would have choice words for him on how he handled the situation. Cops were wrong, but Brown lacked the respect that I believe police deserve.
You have to be kidding me about the respect crap. That cop came in hot looking to show up some black guy. He came in all hero and escalated it. Should have written his ticket, put it on the car and gone for his donut. Instead, he should be put in prison for battery. F this tough guy crap.
-
I seriously do not believe the heat that rocket gets on here. Some of you, even the older posters, try and pick out things out of every post and bash his comments. I really do not understand the need to cherry pick words out of post and run with it.
I would hope that everyone would agree the cops were over aggressive and that should be outed. But, if Brown was my son, I would have choice words for him on how he handled the situation. Cops were wrong, but Brown lacked the respect that I believe police deserve.
Ah hell no. Brown was fine. The police aren’t God. He doesn’t owe them complete compliance. And my kids are his age. I don’t have “choice words” with them. They’re adults.
-
Just watched the video (what's this, the 4th example of body cam footage revealing the truth in the past two weeks?). Found it very disgusting.
Here's another example of body footage revealing truth. I love these cameras. Woman claims cop raped her, didn't realize the camera was on for a full 1 hour and 50 minutes. Ooops.
This came out today.
http://cw33.com/2018/05/23/body-cam-video-disproves-grapevine-womans-sexual-assault-accusation/
More body cameras please. If it reveals the bad cops and the bad citizens, all the better.
-
I seriously do not believe the heat that rocket gets on here. Some of you, even the older posters, try and pick out things out of every post and bash his comments. I really do not understand the need to cherry pick words out of post and run with it.
I would hope that everyone would agree the cops were over aggressive and that should be outed. But, if Brown was my son, I would have choice words for him on how he handled the situation. Cops were wrong, but Brown lacked the respect that I believe police deserve.
C'mon, Goose. I respect you, but these cops acted like felons, thugs and racists. Not to mention liars. It was obvious.
And rocket gave them an out ... just as our nation's leader gave the neo-Nazis and KKK an out in Charlottesville. Blame on "many sides." Sure. No wonder he is a hero to Richard Spencer and David Duke.
As I said in my post to rocket, I don't think he's a bad guy, and I don't know him well enough to know if he's a racist. I like to think he simply has a problem articulating this stuff because he has an overwhelming need to be "fair."
There is no "fair" here. One group of people has been treated unfairly for hundreds of years ... and, incredibly, still is. Despite what one group of Americans would have us believe, reverse discrimination is not a bigger problem in this country than racism is.
I understand the instinct to be "fair." But these cops were thugs. The Nazis were chanting "blood and soil" in Charlottesville. There is no equivalence with "the other side." And the sooner we recognize it as a nation, the better.
I'm not holding my breath.
-
I seriously do not believe the heat that rocket gets on here. Some of you, even the older posters, try and pick out things out of every post and bash his comments. I really do not understand the need to cherry pick words out of post and run with it.
I would hope that everyone would agree the cops were over aggressive and that should be outed. But, if Brown was my son, I would have choice words for him on how he handled the situation. Cops were wrong, but Brown lacked the respect that I believe police deserve.
Goose, I do agree with you that so many people lack respect for how tough the job of a police officer is. And it's not just millennials, it's an all-ages show, and certainly spans racial components. That said, I firmly believe Brown knew he was wrong, and an officer with any common-sense and feel for the situation would've gotten a smile, an apology, and even some ticket revenue from Mr. Brown. Yet, this guy even chooses idiotic, escalating language like "OWNING" his camera to assert his alpha dominance. Imagine if this language were chosen by a person in authority over you, maybe a boss or superior. You would resent that usage. Despite this bungling, Brown remains calm. Brown didn't fully comply, but would you really have been Mr. FULL COMPLIANCE given this jerk's m.o.? You're a better man than I am.
You're right, we should never pigeonhole anybody. Please know that I spent 2o minutes in disbelief at (and then argument against) a comment on Yahoo that double parking over handicap spaces is not that big of a deal. My Mom broke two hips four years ago, and valiantly worked herself back into shape. I was her full-time caregiver before losing her last summer. She walked the malls religiously up until a month from her passing. I got in a couple verbal confrontations with people abusing "handicap" privileges, and if it weren't for our "placard", life outside the home would've been impossible. So, believe me, it irritated me big-time seeing Sterling's ride plonked over two spaces. He's a very young man, and may not have any concept of people's reliance on those spaces. That said, it was 2am. Handled miserably by the patrolman first on the scene.
-
C'mon, Goose. I respect you, but these cops acted like felons, thugs and racists. Not to mention liars. It was obvious.
And rocket gave them an out ... just as our nation's leader gave the neo-Nazis and KKK an out in Charlottesville. Blame on "many sides." Sure. No wonder he is a hero to Richard Spencer and David Duke.
As I said in my post to rocket, I don't think he's a bad guy, and I don't know him well enough to know if he's a racist. I like to think he simply has a problem articulating this stuff because he has an overwhelming need to be "fair."
There is no "fair" here. One group of people has been treated unfairly for hundreds of years ... and, incredibly, still is. Despite what one group of Americans would have us believe, reverse discrimination is not a bigger problem in this country than racism is.
I understand the instinct to be "fair." But these cops were thugs. The Nazis were chanting "blood and soil" in Charlottesville. There is no equivalence with "the other side." And the sooner we recognize it as a nation, the better.
I'm not holding my breath.
'82...
I like what you said re rocket surgeon wanting to be fair and measured. Sometimes I don't want to be misunderstood, so I over explain things. Ahem, cough cough......
There are times I can't watch CNN, but that doesn't mean I'm a full-blown InfoWars or Fox devotee. The truth often resides in the middle, and it can be a grind sorting through the partisan mush. I think I am trying to figure this whole thing out, like many of us. I was off-the-spectrum leftist back in the MU day, then I did a bit of a 30-something Dennis Miller pivot to the right, and I'm leveling off a bit in my mid 40s. Trump is clearly a con artist and goon, but you have to admit he's a refreshing con. Haven't we become a bit too offended as a society? I love Elizabeth Warren, and think she would be 1o times the President Hillary could ever be, but I chuckled at Orange-wave calling her Pocahontas for the liberties taken on her resume or applications. Yet, when I saw a YouTube video of WWII Navajo Code Talkers being honored at the Trump White House, I was sickened and disgusted beyond belief at the Donald bringing up the Pocahontas slur at such a solemn, amazing presentation by the oldest surviving Code Talker, a brilliant and proud patriotic Navajo who fought for the very nation which put his people on reservations. Trump ceased to be refreshing and amusing to me on that day, and I have a healthy sense of humor.
On the Golf Channel today during the women's NCAA golf championship, they did a feature on a Muslim golfer for Nebraska, and all the grief she was subjected to upon arrival in Lincoln. At first, I'm like, "lose the hijab and watch the insults go away." She didn't wear it as a junior golfer, but chose to embrace it later as a young woman. Her parents are respectable people, and her father loves the game probably more than anyone we know. She speaks softly and respectfully, is a normal college gal, but it is hard to see past the head scarf. Her teammates, in particular a formerly insulated young white woman from a Minnesota HS with a total of 3 non-Caucasians, have really stood behind her and protect her from those with hostile intent. That same teammate brought her to tears with a comforting text when a young male classmate said in a radio interview that you have to be violent with people that don't embrace American culture.
I am not sure that the Muslim religion is a peaceful religion. I know it is not the religion of radical Islam, but I still have my questions. We all know where this is going with Christianity and pointing Jesuits and Crusaders. But I do know that the only practitioner of Islam I have ever known was a co-worker at a middle school where I taught for a couple years. She was the nicest, most dedicated teacher I have ever met, a true professional. Extremely thoughtful, reserved and so sweet. For her, her religion was simply about modesty, and that's why she chose to wear a partial hijab.
The last thing I want to be accused of is virtue-signalling. I'm a fan of Jordan Peterson, only insofar as he calls out nonsensical gender identification labels and intolerance of Conservative viewpoints on college campuses. I just hope none of us here paint with broad brushes or label our adversaries. Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade, but I really believe we are all way more alike than we are different.
-
I seriously do not believe the heat that rocket gets on here. Some of you, even the older posters, try and pick out things out of every post and bash his comments. I really do not understand the need to cherry pick words out of post and run with it.
I would hope that everyone would agree the cops were over aggressive and that should be outed. But, if Brown was my son, I would have choice words for him on how he handled the situation. Cops were wrong, but Brown lacked the respect that I believe police deserve.
You really think those pigs deserved respect? What respect should blacks have for a group of people who have assaulted and murdered them for decades, if not centuries.
And your defense of a poster who always finds blame for the non-white person at all times is astonishing.
This was a simple gang assault by the police. We all know it. The Police Dept. knows it. Why does it hurt so much for some people here to admit I it?
-
Jockey
I try very hard to never read your posts, and wish I had followed that rule tonight. I truly feel sorry for the hate and anger you have in some of your posts.
I 99.9% of the time shy away from hot button topics on here, and always laugh when I see guys laughing about topic getting locked. This is one time I am putting personal lock on a thread.
Again, I am very disappointed in myself for taking the time read your post. I do not know your age, race or religion, but I think I have a pretty good feel of the type of person you are. Good luck, and thanks for making me personally lock a thread.
-
It is such a toxin, such a stain. You don't want to accuse your brother of being racist. At the same time, you don't want to let words or actions you perceive as racist go unchallenged. The eternal dilemma.
-
Two things I'll say about this:
1) I tend to be pro-police; and
2) This video made me literally sick to my stomach and profoundly sad.
-
It's always so nice, every 3-4 months a police video comes out where the citizens of the US can come together, and with one voice say "I see exactly what I want to see in this video."
-
Well I think it is entirely undeniable that if this were a white man, there is zero chance it would have gone this far. Which is the entire point of the topic.
-
It's always so nice, every 3-4 months a police video comes out where the citizens of the US can come together, and with one voice say "I see exactly what I want to see in this video."
Agree. We are, in the end, the sum of our experiences. No one is without bias. The reasonable and well intended will only disagree on the close calls. To the haters there's no such thing as a close call.
-
Well I think it is entirely undeniable that if this were a white man, there is zero chance it would have gone this far. Which is the entire point of the topic.
I don't know that zero is the number but this is a point well made nonetheless.
-
I don't know that zero is the number but this is a point well made nonetheless.
I agree. I think far less likely that this happens with a white person, but possible (which still supports the point being addressed in this thread).
I think another very serious factor that led to this issue is the ridiculous over-response by the police. I think I counted five additional squads responding. Even the original officer went to a couple of the others and said he only wanted one back up. Once there were that many cops around, it seemed to escalate out of control as they wanted to show each other how "in charge" they were. Despite the fact that the original cop was extremely confrontational from the outset and escalated the situation, I don't necessarily think that this would have happened if there hadn't suddenly been so many cops there. They seemed to take the attitude, "well, if there are this many of us here, it must be a serious and dangerous situation." In that context, I think that things might have spun out of control even with a white person. But, I do think it's less likely.
All that said, I'd really like to know what the original cop said when he called for backup. Did he mention Brown's race at that time? Did he know Brown's race? If the race was mentioned, is that why another five cars showed up?
-
Well I think it is entirely undeniable that if this were a white man, there is zero chance it would have gone this far. Which is the entire point of the topic.
Spot on.
-
'82...
I like what you said re rocket surgeon wanting to be fair and measured. Sometimes I don't want to be misunderstood, so I over explain things. Ahem, cough cough......
There are times I can't watch CNN, but that doesn't mean I'm a full-blown InfoWars or Fox devotee. The truth often resides in the middle, and it can be a grind sorting through the partisan mush. I think I am trying to figure this whole thing out, like many of us. I was off-the-spectrum leftist back in the MU day, then I did a bit of a 30-something Dennis Miller pivot to the right, and I'm leveling off a bit in my mid 40s. Trump is clearly a con artist and goon, but you have to admit he's a refreshing con. Haven't we become a bit too offended as a society? I love Elizabeth Warren, and think she would be 1o times the President Hillary could ever be, but I chuckled at Orange-wave calling her Pocahontas for the liberties taken on her resume or applications. Yet, when I saw a YouTube video of WWII Navajo Code Talkers being honored at the Trump White House, I was sickened and disgusted beyond belief at the Donald bringing up the Pocahontas slur at such a solemn, amazing presentation by the oldest surviving Code Talker, a brilliant and proud patriotic Navajo who fought for the very nation which put his people on reservations. Trump ceased to be refreshing and amusing to me on that day, and I have a healthy sense of humor.
On the Golf Channel today during the women's NCAA golf championship, they did a feature on a Muslim golfer for Nebraska, and all the grief she was subjected to upon arrival in Lincoln. At first, I'm like, "lose the hijab and watch the insults go away." She didn't wear it as a junior golfer, but chose to embrace it later as a young woman. Her parents are respectable people, and her father loves the game probably more than anyone we know. She speaks softly and respectfully, is a normal college gal, but it is hard to see past the head scarf. Her teammates, in particular a formerly insulated young white woman from a Minnesota HS with a total of 3 non-Caucasians, have really stood behind her and protect her from those with hostile intent. That same teammate brought her to tears with a comforting text when a young male classmate said in a radio interview that you have to be violent with people that don't embrace American culture.
I am not sure that the Muslim religion is a peaceful religion. I know it is not the religion of radical Islam, but I still have my questions. We all know where this is going with Christianity and pointing Jesuits and Crusaders. But I do know that the only practitioner of Islam I have ever known was a co-worker at a middle school where I taught for a couple years. She was the nicest, most dedicated teacher I have ever met, a true professional. Extremely thoughtful, reserved and so sweet. For her, her religion was simply about modesty, and that's why she chose to wear a partial hijab.
The last thing I want to be accused of is virtue-signalling. I'm a fan of Jordan Peterson, only insofar as he calls out nonsensical gender identification labels and intolerance of Conservative viewpoints on college campuses. I just hope none of us here paint with broad brushes or label our adversaries. Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade, but I really believe we are all way more alike than we are different.
NDC:
You are fairly new here, so mainly I will say that your post is overly political and I'm a little surprised it has survived the mods.
I am not going to refute or agree with anything you say here other than ...
<<Trump is clearly a con artist and goon, but you have to admit he's a refreshing con. >>
I have to admit no such thing. Spanky Dennison is by far the most corrupt person ever to hold the highest office in our land, and it saddens me deeply that tens of millions of Americans were so easily conned by him - and continue to be conned by him.
Congratulations on realizing that "Trump ceased to be refreshing and amusing." It is a big thing to admit, and thankfully many Americans who were conned by him in 2016 are coming to that realization.
Have a good one.
-
Trump is clearly a con artist and goon, but you have to admit he's a refreshing con. Haven't we become a bit too offended as a society? I love Elizabeth Warren, and think she would be 1o times the President Hillary could ever be, but I chuckled at Orange-wave calling her Pocahontas for the liberties taken on her resume or applications. Yet, when I saw a YouTube video of WWII Navajo Code Talkers being honored at the Trump White House, I was sickened and disgusted beyond belief at the Donald bringing up the Pocahontas slur at such a solemn, amazing presentation by the oldest surviving Code Talker, a brilliant and proud patriotic Navajo who fought for the very nation which put his people on reservations. Trump ceased to be refreshing and amusing to me on that day, and I have a healthy sense of humor.
We all have our tipping points. Calling Nazis and KKK members "some very fine people" for example.
-
You really think those pigs deserved respect? What respect should blacks have for a group of people who have assaulted and murdered them for decades, if not centuries.
And your defense of a poster who always finds blame for the non-white person at all times is astonishing.
This was a simple gang assault by the police. We all know it. The Police Dept. knows it. Why does it hurt so much for some people here to admit I it?
n
Dude, calling the cops in this case pigs, no matter their behavior is totally unproductive and gross. Not cool.
-
n
Dude, calling the cops in this case pigs, no matter their behavior is totally unproductive and gross. Not cool.
Agreed. Unnecessary.
Kaepernick hurt his case by wearing socks that included depictions of cops as pigs. Name-calling rarely leads to productive discourse.
C'mon brandy! Be better than that!
-
Here are a list of questions I'd really love to see answered:
-The mayor and chief of police say the behavior by the police was inappropriate....where and why? How should they have behaved?
-What punishments have been implemented and why?
-For years, police and the mayor have been crying about police funding and the impact on police response....given that, how is it that within 10 minutes, 8 cops(5 "squads") total were onsite for at most a parking citation?
-As a citizen we are not required to "comply" with the orders of police that aren't impacting the well being of other citizens. Mr. Brown provided identification and responded to initial questioning before deciding to provide no further comment. Why do the police feel that he should be obligated to provide more information or be "more compliant"?
-This was a parking violation, what probable cause did the police have to do more than just issue a citation?
-
Here are a list of questions I'd really love to see answered:
-The mayor and chief of police say the behavior by the police was inappropriate....where and why? How should they have behaved?
-What punishments have been implemented and why?
-For years, police and the mayor have been crying about police funding and the impact on police response....given that, how is it that within 10 minutes, 8 cops(5 "squads") total were onsite for at most a parking citation?
-As a citizen we are not required to "comply" with the orders of police that aren't impacting the well being of other citizens. Mr. Brown provided identification and responded to initial questioning before deciding to provide no further comment. Why do the police feel that he should be obligated to provide more information or be "more compliant"?
-This was a parking violation, what probable cause did the police have to do more than just issue a citation?
Outstanding.
mu03eng for mayor!
-
'82...
Trump is clearly a con artist and goon, but you have to admit he's a refreshing con.
I hear Jeffrey Dahmer was a nice murderer. I mean, he gave his victims dinner before killing him and often made them unconscious before drilling holes in their head to kill them He was a refreshing murderer.
Seriously, dude? "He's a con artist and criminal but hey, he's a good dude, give him the benefit of the doubt." Another type of the "fine people on both sides", eh?
-
I hear Jeffrey Dahmer was a nice murderer. I mean, he gave his victims dinner before killing him and often made them unconscious before drilling holes in their head to kill them He was a refreshing murderer.
Seriously, dude? "He's a con artist and criminal but hey, he's a good dude, give him the benefit of the doubt." Another type of the "fine people on both sides", eh?
Speaking of, where's old Results-Are-All-That-Matter Keefer today? Maybe he got lost in there with all the Results he thought were coming.
-
Here is a very hopeful op/ed from Isaac Bailey, a member of the Charlotte Observer editorial board. He is a black guy who regularly writes about racial issues.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article211729294.html
-
I hear Jeffrey Dahmer was a nice murderer. I mean, he gave his victims dinner before killing him and often made them unconscious before drilling holes in their head to kill them He was a refreshing murderer.
Seriously, dude? "He's a con artist and criminal but hey, he's a good dude, give him the benefit of the doubt." Another type of the "fine people on both sides", eh?
Wow, you're pretty naive to think no politician ever made promises that he or she had no intent of delivering on. The smart money is on you being duped several times, apparently without you ever admitting it. I could name the former leaders tucking their napkins in their shirt and enjoying you with some fava and a nice chianti, but I don't stoop so low. Wow, equating voters with murder victims, and a sitting President with a serial killer. Those on the right who shamefully dehumanized President Obama have nothing on you.
-
Here is a very hopeful op/ed from Isaac Bailey, a member of the Charlotte Observer editorial board. He is a black guy who regularly writes about racial issues.
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article211729294.html
The fact of the matter is that this is probably far more common than interactions that turn violent. Everyone would do well to remember that.
Edited to add: Because of the tone of this and other threads, I feel compelled to preemptively add that this is not a defense of police in any particular instance; this is not a denial of white privilege in general; and this is not a denial that there are some serious problems with police interactions with the public in general, and with black men in particular. It simply is to point out that the overwhelming majority of interactions with police are uneventful.
-
We all have our tipping points. Calling Nazis and KKK members "some very fine people" for example.
You know damn well what he meant. My best friend was basically a saint, the greatest guy I've ever known. He died from cancer two years ago. He attended several Pro-life rallies, where he pleaded with people on his side not to use terms like "baby killers" and "murderer".
This just in......there are azz-clowns on each side of every political debate, and there are fine people on each side. My whole post was intended to get people to stop painting people into a corner. So much for tolerance.
Smug post assailing my "tipping point" as failing your knee-jerk test. But I don't take offense. I dismiss it as the province of politics, a brutal game where once rational people revert to their lowest common denominator. And I said that about Trump from Day1, as he is the master at it. I didn't vote in the last election as I grappled with the "lesser of two evils" thing to the point of exhaustion. But I'm painted into his corner. Congrats.
-
You know damn well what he meant. My best friend was basically a saint, the greatest guy I've ever known. He died from cancer two years ago. He attended several Pro-life rallies, where he pleaded with people on his side not to use terms like "baby killers" and "murderer".
This just in......there are azz-clowns on each side of every political debate, and there are fine people on each side. My whole post was intended to get people to stop painting people into a corner. So much for tolerance.
Smug post assailing my "tipping point" as failing your knee-jerk test. But I don't take offense. I dismiss it as the province of politics, a brutal game where once rational people revert to their lowest common denominator. And I said that about Trump from Day1, as he is the master at it. I didn't vote in the last election as I grappled with the "lesser of two evils" thing to the point of exhaustion. But I'm painted into his corner. Congrats.
Not trying to single you out because you're not the only one who has politicized this thread, but what is the point? If you go meet with someone in person like your friend did, meaningful discussions can happen and can lead to change, but fighting behind a keyboard essentially has a zero percent chance of changing someone's mind, and can only lead to increased pettiness. If you're really dead set on getting into a fight on the internet, go to a discussion board specifically built for politics, not one that actively discourages political discussion. Once again, you're not the only culprit of this, just the most recent.
-
NDC:
You are fairly new here, so mainly I will say that your post is overly political and I'm a little surprised it has survived the mods.
I am not going to refute or agree with anything you say here other than ...
<<Trump is clearly a con artist and goon, but you have to admit he's a refreshing con. >>
I have to admit no such thing. Spanky Dennison is by far the most corrupt person ever to hold the highest office in our land, and it saddens me deeply that tens of millions of Americans were so easily conned by him - and continue to be conned by him.
Congratulations on realizing that "Trump ceased to be refreshing and amusing." It is a big thing to admit, and thankfully many Americans who were conned by him in 2016 are coming to that realization.
Have a good one.
MU82,
Many here missed the point of my post. I don't think you did, and your tone is always respectful, if sometimes a bit cautious. Don't worry, I'm not a curled up rabid dog with a Trump branding tucked under my tail. I am an open book who sometimes reveals too much. I was lauding your take on rocket surgeon's measured fairness. Now, back to my book on Hillary's KURU disease, which she contracted from years of spirit cooking and cannibalism. ;)
Politics, circa 2008-2018: the art of asinine, cartoonish demonization of your opponents to achieve your desired ends.
I started my definition with the year 2o08, because as any sentient being knows, the level of dehumanization faced by President Obama from the moment he took office was sickening and unprecedented.
-
Not trying to single you out because you're not the only one who has politicized this thread, but what is the point? If you go meet with someone in person like your friend did, meaningful discussions can happen and can lead to change, but fighting behind a keyboard essentially has a zero percent chance of changing someone's mind, and can only lead to increased pettiness. If you're really dead set on getting into a fight on the internet, go to a discussion board specifically built for politics, not one that actively discourages political discussion. Once again, you're not the only culprit of this, just the most recent.
No, you're absolutely right. I saw a couple posters getting attacked for posting their opinions on a sensitive manner. I went into a diatribe to illustrate how complex, fragile, and disjointed the tapestry of life can be. That none of us truly know anybody's true colors. Even when we do, we shouldn't judge people. Many of us are still trying to figure out where we stand, and if you talk to me about one issue I may seem off-the-spectrum leftist, while another makes me look like a Breitbart adherent. Every discussion is inherently political, to some degree. Off-season boredom, coupled with a sensitive topic and board-bullying led me to an ill-advised post. Guilty as charged.
-
You know damn well what he meant.
Yes, he meant exactly what he said.
I'd call it a dog whistle for his base, except a dog whistle is meant to be something only they can hear. In this case, he said it, he meant it, and he wanted everyone to hear it.
But let's retrace: You gave an example of actions that caused you to change your opinion; I gave a similar example. It wasn't meant as an attack on you, so not sure how you read it as such.
-
Jockey
I try very hard to never read your posts, and wish I had followed that rule tonight. I truly feel sorry for the hate and anger you have in some of your posts.
I 99.9% of the time shy away from hot button topics on here, and always laugh when I see guys laughing about topic getting locked. This is one time I am putting personal lock on a thread.
Again, I am very disappointed in myself for taking the time read your post. I do not know your age, race or religion, but I think I have a pretty good feel of the type of person you are. Good luck, and thanks for making me personally lock a thread.
thank you goose-for the support! many times when i respond to a post, i do learn from the feedback. sometimes i even temper my opinions and other times, i may even learn something. whether some here realize it or not, i do try to exercise some humility. it is unfortunate that some here have such angry, spiteful responses to opinions they may disagree with. there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone, but it can be done politely, imho of course.
-
n
Dude, calling the cops in this case pigs, no matter their behavior is totally unproductive and gross. Not cool.
With all due respect, I disagree Eng. Generally, I kinda take your comments as a default on Scoop. They are always reasoned and steady whether I agree, disagree, or am somewhere in the middle. But we know that Mr. Brown was mocked and assaulted for only one reason - he skin was dark. So, I really feel that this is the time when cops should be called out in the harshest words possible - especially when we know there is going to be almost no accountability from the punishments meted out.
Police have been corrupt as a matter of practice. $21,000,000 has been paid out by the city of Milwaukee over the last 2 1/2 years for police misconduct. Many cities have paid out much more. We, as citizens, must let them know this conduct is no longer acceptable no matter what the climate is in the country. Ever.
Normally when a gang of thugs assault someone, they are called out as such. Police should be treated the same as anyone else - actually, we should expect more from them. They are professionals and highly trained. Our lives are often in their hands. Sadly, the lives of blacks are also often in their hands.
-
Yes, he meant exactly what he said.
I'd call it a dog whistle for his base, except a dog whistle is meant to be something only they can hear. In this case, he said it, he meant it, and he wanted everyone to hear it.
But let's retrace: You gave an example of actions that caused you to change your opinion; I gave a similar example. It wasn't meant as an attack on you, so not sure how you read it as such.
This.
Spanky made 4 comments on Charlottesville, 2 without a script, 1 with a semi-script, and 1 a speech written for him that he read from the teleprompter.
The first one, with the semi-script, he made the "many sides" statement and otherwise was quite soft on the KKK and neo-Nazis. It certainly was not a rebuke.
Next came the speech because he was getting heat for his previous comments (and deservedly so). He looked like an American who had been kidnapped by the Taliban and forced to read it at gunpoint. There was never a doubt that he didn't believe a word of it.
Then came 2 political rallies where he basically said, "You know what I said in that speech? Forget it! It was all BS. He said there were very fine people on both sides ... and Richard Spencer and David Duke thanked him for his support.
He is a racist, it's not even questionable. As racist as Nixon, and 10 times as dangerous to our democratic republic.
-
Jockey
I am far from easily offended, but I find your comments to be offensive. Your lack of general respect is very disturbing to me.
-
Jockey
I am far from easily offended, but I find your comments to be offensive. Your lack of general respect is very disturbing to me.
Thank you for your honest opinion.
Yes, what I am saying may be offensive. I won't argue your point as you seem to be a poster with integrity. But it is nowhere near as offensive as what police do to minorities on a daily basis. Should we respect what police did to Brown? Or should we condemn it in the harshest terms possible?
I guess what I am trying to say is that I hope I AM offensive enough to convey how angered I am over this sort of thing happening over and over. Ignoring it hasn't helped, mild anger hasn't helped. It is going to take more.
Every time another police beating, assault, or killing happens, the police apologists come out. Just know I will not be among them.
-
Jockey
I am far from easily offended, but I find your comments to be offensive. Your lack of general respect is very disturbing to me.
I already responded to this post once, but I would like you to read this from Jim Stingl of the JS.
When I watch that awful body cam video of the Sterling Brown arrest, I see black and white and no shades of gray.
There's Brown, a young African-American man who happens to play for the Milwaukee Bucks. He parked across two handicapped spots during a quick stop at Walgreens at 2 a.m. Not the best idea, but a ticket would suffice.
And there is the army of white police officers that surrounds Brown, throws him to the ground, zaps him with a Taser, cuffs and arrests him.
It's painfully clear. From the very beginning of the encounter, Brown in his hoodie is assumed to be a criminal and is treated like one by police. This is what people of color across this country experience every day.
The first officer to make contact with Brown immediately accuses him of obstructing for standing too close. He picks a fight.
Then the officer sets the tone for everything about to follow: "I'll do what I want, all right? I own this right here," he says.
That's a thousand miles from protect and serve.
Brown, calm and speaking softly, gives the perfect reply: "You don't own me, though."
The officer calls Brown dude and man. Not sir. "Everything I'm doing is on camera, dude."
It sure is. And it's providing a clear look at what overreacting jerks these cops were early on Jan. 26 at 27th and National.
Alfonso Morales, who became police chief after this incident happened, said some members of his department acted inappropriately and were disciplined. That's good. But then he threw a tarp over his promise of transparency by refusing to answer questions from reporters.
"I am sorry this incident escalated to this level," he said.
We are, too. Brown was put through a terrifying ordeal and likely feared he could be shot dead like so many young black men before him. And Milwaukee gets another black eye as the video spreads across news and social media everywhere.
It's comical that the police union points to this incident as evidence of inadequate staffing. That parking lot filled with police cars and officers, and they hung around waiting for the big takedown.
You wonder if Officer Do What I Want begins to realize that Brown is not just the typical citizen that he bullies, but rather a celebrity that will lead to intense scrutiny of his actions.
But he doesn't sound worried about that later in the video when he says to a fellow officer, "Now he's like, well, I'm a Bucks player, blah, blah, blah. So what."
I still don't understand why the officers surrounding Brown suddenly became so concerned about the fact that his hands were in his pockets on this cold morning. He had been standing that way for several minutes and no one was alarmed. And let's remind ourselves that he was careless about parking his car, not a robbery or murder suspect.
Eight minutes into the video, the cops tackle Brown, or as the chief puts it, they decentralize him. If was like six against one at that point, but the officers still felt the need to tase him. You can hear him groaning in pain. It's sickening.
Brown ended up charged with nothing. He plans to sue the police.
"Situations like mine and worse happen every day in the black community. Being a voice and a face for people who won't be heard and don't have the same platform as I have is a responsibility I take seriously," he said in a statement.
Nobody is saying police work is easy. Officers find themselves in dangerous and even deadly situations all too often. Many serve honorably.
But Mayor Tom Barrett is right that what happened in this parking lot on this night is offensive. He apologized to Brown.
That apology should extend back over decades to the countless victims of police brutality that we never got to see on video.
Can you even imagine what Brown had to be thinking as these officers assaulted him? Do you think images of beaten and murdered blacks went through his mind? I called these officers "pigs". Stingl calls them "overreacting jerks". What would you call them?
-
Yes, he meant exactly what he said.
I'd call it a dog whistle for his base, except a dog whistle is meant to be something only they can hear. In this case, he said it, he meant it, and he wanted everyone to hear it.
But let's retrace: You gave an example of actions that caused you to change your opinion; I gave a similar example. It wasn't meant as an attack on you, so not sure how you read it as such.
My bad. No big deal. I think I was still smarting from Billy Hoyle basically accusing me of harboring a serial killer by not rejecting Trump sooner, not lol.
-
Wow, you're pretty naive to think no politician ever made promises that he or she had no intent of delivering on. The smart money is on you being duped several times, apparently without you ever admitting it. I could name the former leaders tucking their napkins in their shirt and enjoying you with some fava and a nice chianti, but I don't stoop so low. Wow, equating voters with murder victims, and a sitting President with a serial killer. Those on the right who shamefully dehumanized President Obama have nothing on you.
Somebody is triggered and is projecting after being exposed as foolish with your “sure, he’s a con artist and criminal but he’s a nice con artist and criminal” approach. Many are duped (I once thought Scott Walker was a good and genuine guy) but to admit that one knows what a person is but believe “it’s ok, he’ll change for me” is beyond naive. I would have hoped MU would have taught you stronger logical and critical thinking skills.
-
Somebody is triggered and is projecting after being exposed as foolish with your “sure, he’s a con artist and criminal but he’s a nice con artist and criminal” approach. Many are duped (I once thought Scott Walker was a good and genuine guy) but to admit that one knows what a person is but believe “it’s ok, he’ll change for me” is beyond naive. I would have hoped MU would have taught you stronger logical and critical thinking skills.
Where did I ever signal support for him or call him nice? I intimated that I put up with him, and found his whole charade sadly funny, until he failed to see how much this country meant to one Navajo who spoke so eloquently about serving during WWII. Trump cheapened the event and was beyond petty by tarnishing that gathering by invoking the Pocahantas jab again at Elizabeth Warren.
I tolerated him because up until then, this was the first time he engaged not just "enemy combatants" like the media and pol opponents, but dissed the very group he brought to the White House to "honor." In sum, he couldn't resist his own narcissistic folly. Ok, he was out of line in his mocking of the disabled reporter, so I maybe missed my bus stop there.
Elites have a hammerlock on our politics. Have for decades. The world is but a stage. You are mistaken if you think there is a huge difference between the parties. I would expect better critical thinking from an MU grad. May I suggest the works of Russel Means, a great Native American thinker who overcame drug addiction and secured multiple degrees. He calls out the political class en-masse for failing to adhere to any semblance of our Constitution, a document which borrowed ideas from tribal constitutions. He posits that we all have become an enslaved citizenry by willfully ceding our property, privacy, and civil rights to false patriotism and a diabolical Federal Reserve. Trump is just another in a long line of deceitful politicians.
-
Somebody is triggered and is projecting after being exposed as foolish with your “sure, he’s a con artist and criminal but he’s a nice con artist and criminal” approach. Many are duped (I once thought Scott Walker was a good and genuine guy) but to admit that one knows what a person is but believe “it’s ok, he’ll change for me” is beyond naive. I would have hoped MU would have taught you stronger logical and critical thinking skills.
Oh, my bad. I just read your "tagline", and I could've saved myself time in responding. It speaks volumes about you. My father had a storied political career, and he took me aside at a young age and said, "If anyone claims to 'tell it like it is', unless he's Walter Cronkite, you can be certain they are one of two things: full of themselves or of fecal matter." Glad you have it all figured out though....congrats.
-
Jockey
I am far from easily offended, but I find your comments to be offensive. Your lack of general respect is very disturbing to me.
note the empathy from the police haters...crickets. goose, you are the only one bothering to comment on these knee-jerk responses he has toward all police. i cringe to think what it's like in jockrash's house when news that a cop(s)were ambushed and killed trying to protect. yes, there are some bad seed cops out there, but...with all his angry rhetoric, i'd love to see the reaction on his face after they just saved one of his family members from some type of distress. or would he not even call the police to help with his pent up anger toward police.
here is a silly little statistic probably overlooked by jock-more white people are killed by cops than blacks
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/
juxtapose these responses to jockstrap to who respond to mine-i'd have 7 or 8 of these guys pummeling me on this board if i disagreed with them on "more taste" or "less filling"
there are a few professions that i respect the hell out of-military, law enforcement, airline pilots and father flanigan. i realize we all put our pants on one leg at a time, but some of these do not know if they will be coming home to take them off the same
-
note the empathy from the police haters...crickets. goose, you are the only one bothering to comment on these knee-jerk responses he has toward all police. i cringe to think what it's like in jockrash's house when news that a cop(s)were ambushed and killed trying to protect. yes, there are some bad seed cops out there, but...with all his angry rhetoric, i'd love to see the reaction on his face after they just saved one of his family members from some type of distress. or would he not even call the police to help with his pent up anger toward police.
here is a silly little statistic probably overlooked by jock-more white people are killed by cops than blacks
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/
juxtapose these responses to jockstrap to who respond to mine-i'd have 7 or 8 of these guys pummeling me on this board if i disagreed with them on "more taste" or "less filling"
there are a few professions that i respect the hell out of-military, law enforcement, airline pilots and father flanigan. i realize we all put our pants on one leg at a time, but some of these do not know if they will be coming home to take them off the same
Blatantly a lie. Go back through the thread. Multiple people told brand that it was inappropriate to insult the police
-
here is a silly little statistic probably overlooked by jock-more white people are killed by cops than blacks
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/
Well no kidding. Whites make up 60% of the population. Blacks make up about 12%.
And that's not the point of this topic. The point is that Brown was very likely treated differently than a white person was due to his race.
-
My bad. No big deal. I think I was still smarting from Billy Hoyle basically accusing me of harboring a serial killer by not rejecting Trump sooner, not lol.
No worries. I figured something must have gotten lost in translation to get that sort of reaction when I was basically agreeing with the part I quoted.
-
Rocket
It is funny, but as a rule I am not overly trusting of police. I respect their job and their role in our society a great deal, and on the other hand, I have a fear of them. As a white male, living in an almost all white suburb I find it strange I fear them.
I guess my point is, I understand, to a very, very small degree, the anger others have on the Brown case. That said, I would never paint an entire group of people as being pigs or bad people. The older I get, the more I try very hard not to paint with wide brush.
-
Rocket
It is funny, but as a rule I am not overly trusting of police. I respect their job and their role in our society a great deal, and on the other hand, I have a fear of them. As a white male, living in an almost all white suburb I find it strange I fear them.
Goose, I agree with you here.
I respect police entirely, but when you have a confrontation with one (even one as innocuous as a speeding ticket), they have all the power. They are an agent of the state. I understand they have a hard job to do, but my individual liberty is generally not their primary concern.
-
Blatantly a lie. Go back through the thread. Multiple people told brand that it was inappropriate to insult the police
Yep. As usual, sees what he wants to see.
I don't like the word, "pig" when it comes to cops, because it is an unnecessary, lazy label. It's the cop version of the n-word, or "kike" or any other racial/ethnic insult. It's just an unnecessary term.
"Pigs" are farm animals. They don't attack people just for the hell of it.
Thugs, jerks, bullies and a-holes do - and that's what those cops are. I truly hope they serve time, but I doubt they will.
-
Rocket
It is funny, but as a rule I am not overly trusting of police. I respect their job and their role in our society a great deal, and on the other hand, I have a fear of them. As a white male, living in an almost all white suburb I find it strange I fear them.
I guess my point is, I understand, to a very, very small degree, the anger others have on the Brown case. That said, I would never paint an entire group of people as being pigs or bad people. The older I get, the more I try very hard not to paint with wide brush.
THIS. What is troubling is Jockey has said in the past statements that disparage minority groups are wrong (as they should be), but does the same thing here by broadly disparaging this group, police in this case. Not sure he recognizes that he is doing what he chimes against, including his favorite guy in the WH that does this all the time and Jockey doing same thing. Broad brush is wrong.
EDIT: For clarity
-
I don't know that zero is the number but this is a point well made nonetheless.
Definitely not zero, can easily pull up examples on You Tube to show that isn't the case, but agree the number is low and point made.
-
Rocket
It is funny, but as a rule I am not overly trusting of police. I respect their job and their role in our society a great deal, and on the other hand, I have a fear of them. As a white male, living in an almost all white suburb I find it strange I fear them.
I guess my point is, I understand, to a very, very small degree, the anger others have on the Brown case. That said, I would never paint an entire group of people as being pigs or bad people. The older I get, the more I try very hard not to paint with wide brush.
I may upset people here, but at least I try to be honest.
I gladly give you the benefit of the doubt in this thread and assume you just read my comment wrong.....
so, please re-read my comment. I did not paint an entire group of people as "pigs", or for that matter, as anything at all. My comment was clear that I was referring specifically to the thug cops in the Sterling Brown incident.
And while some here have, I only wish that good, decent white people would express more outrage over these incidents.
-
THIS. What is troubling is Jockey has said in the past statements that disparage minority groups, but does the same thing here by broadly disparaging this group, police in this case. Not sure he recognizes that he is doing what he chimes against, including his favorite guy in the WH that does this all the time and Jockey doing same thing. Broad brush is wrong.
Simply wrong. I have not broadly disparaged all police in this thread. I have spoken specifically about a handful of thug cops.
-
Simply wrong. I have not broadly disparaged all police in this thread. I have spoken specifically about a handful of thug cops.
Just don't use "pigs" when talking about cops, brand.
If a black guy kills somebody, do you use the n-word? No you do not, because that would be disparaging an entire race even though you were referring to only one person.
"Pig" has become the cop version of the n-word. Just don't use it. You don't need to. There's no reason.
-
Just don't use "pigs" when talking about cops, brand.
If a black guy kills somebody, do you use the n-word? No you do not, because that would be disparaging an entire race even though you were referring to only one person.
"Pig" has become the cop version of the n-word. Just don't use it. You don't need to. There's no reason.
That is quite a stretch.
-
Just don't use "pigs" when talking about cops, brand.
If a black guy kills somebody, do you use the n-word? No you do not, because that would be disparaging an entire race even though you were referring to only one person.
"Pig" has become the cop version of the n-word. Just don't use it. You don't need to. There's no reason.
Thank you, Mike. I will take your advice. My point was to express anger and to try to make people angry. Your response has given me a good perspective about the use of certain words (and the differing perceptions of them) - just as I would expect from you.
But I did find a lot of humor in some of the responses. Some of those who accused me of attacking all police while continuing to support a man who is trying to tear down and de-legitimize law enforcement institutions in this country were quite fascinating.
-
That is quite a stretch.
It's a term that is offensive to a large plurality of the group of people to whom it refers.
If you think using offensive terms about other groups is unacceptable, why would this be any different?
-
That is quite a stretch.
The general public does not consider "pig" as inflammatory as the n-word, true, so I can see why you'd call it a stretch.
But my point is that "pig" is an unnecessary label that doesn't advance the conversation. It is base name-calling. Maybe a better analogy would have been "f-a-g" - another word that brand would never use. Not as inflammatory as the n-word, but simply not acceptable or necessary.
brand is intelligent enough to make a point without resorting to "pig." We all are.
Again, due to semantics, we're getting away from the actual subject of the thread. The cops deserve severe punishment.
-
Simply wrong. I have not broadly disparaged all police in this thread. I have spoken specifically about a handful of thug cops.
But you are doing exactly what you accuse some other powerful people of doing. Your favorite politician can also say he was only talking about some MS13 or some people from certain countries, or some people from Mexico. Do you not recognize this? You are doing what he does.
-
That is quite a stretch.
I agree that is a stretch.
I think a more apt comparison would be the oft-criticized reference to young black men as "thugs." It's a very loaded term, that carries a lot of baggage and suggest an underlying bias against young black men -- not just those being referenced. Many bristle at the use of the term -- even if describing "thuggish" behavior -- because they think it has somewhat racial undertones. In short, it is unproductive.
I think "pig" is similar because it carries a log of baggage. It suggests an underlying bias against all police officers -- not just those being referenced. Many bristle at the use of the term -- even if describing "piggish" behavior. In short, as initially said by someone a few pages ago, it's unproductive.
What these cops did was disgusting. They could rightfully be called thugs, criminals, bullies, a**holes or even animals.
-
That is quite a stretch.
Not really. It is a major pejorative with only negative connotations with the intent to slur. To many great men, women that wear the uniform daily to slur all because of the actions of a few.
-
Not really. It is a major pejorative with only negative connotations with the intent to slur. To many great men, women that wear the uniform daily to slur all because of the actions of a few.
Yes, really. It's a massive stretch. (sorry, MU82).
"Pig" in reference to a police officer is a pejorative and has no place in civil discourse (it is acceptable when discussing bacon and similarly delicious meatstuffs, of course).
But it is nothing close to the 'N' word. And that's because "pig" is not used in the context of centuries of murder, slavery, abuse, discrimination, rape, assault and various other forms of oppression. Cops are not a downtrodden segment of society historically held back by the power structure. They are the power structure (or at least the primary tool of the power structure).
Again, it's an insult that's better left unsaid. But it's light years from the other word, and any comparison of the two is made in utter ignorance of history.
-
Rocket
It is funny, but as a rule I am not overly trusting of police. I respect their job and their role in our society a great deal, and on the other hand, I have a fear of them. As a white male, living in an almost all white suburb I find it strange I fear them.
I guess my point is, I understand, to a very, very small degree, the anger others have on the Brown case. That said, I would never paint an entire group of people as being pigs or bad people. The older I get, the more I try very hard not to paint with wide brush.
goose-i fully understand what you mean-my fear, i guess, translates to respect. i feel if i show them respect, do what they say, take my hands out of my pockets, drop the cell phone, lay down on the ground...whatever they want, i will do until they feel safe with me. i have nothing to hide. if i still get roughed up, then the D.A. will have to sort it out with my attorney
also, i carry. the first thing i am going to tell them is, i have a gun, show them my permit and tell them where the gun is. that is an absolute!!
it seems as though many of these incidents involving the police getting more physical then what apparently is needed, the perpetrators, eventual victims or what have you, do not follow the orders given to them.
-
I may upset people here, but at least I try to be honest.
I gladly give you the benefit of the doubt in this thread and assume you just read my comment wrong.....
so, please re-read my comment. I did not paint an entire group of people as "pigs", or for that matter, as anything at all. My comment was clear that I was referring specifically to the thug cops in the Sterling Brown incident.
And while some here have, I only wish that good, decent white people would express more outrage over these incidents.
Jockey, here's the problem I have with your overall position on this. You are treating it as fact that this is racism when we have no idea if that is true or not. This is just as likely really bad policing which is really bad and reason for outrage. I'm with you that it probably was racial motivated but based on the militarization and entitlement of police officers I've encountered I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't them just being bad at their jobs/bad attitude.
Regardless of whether racism was involved or they are just really bad at their jobs it still doesn't raise to the level of it being ok to label a group of people by a highly derogatory term. If we're going to fix these types of problems we're going to need allies from the communities that view the use of pigs as highly inflammatory.
-
goose-i fully understand what you mean-my fear, i guess, translates to respect. i feel if i show them respect, do what they say, take my hands out of my pockets, drop the cell phone, lay down on the ground...whatever they want, i will do until they feel safe with me. i have nothing to hide. if i still get roughed up, then the D.A. will have to sort it out with my attorney
also, i carry. the first thing i am going to tell them is, i have a gun, show them my permit and tell them where the gun is. that is an absolute!!
it seems as though many of these incidents involving the police getting more physical then what apparently is needed, the perpetrators, eventual victims or what have you, do not follow the orders given to them.
Here is the problem I have, this very attitude is what enables the bad actors within the police force. Police are public servants who's job is to engage the public positively if at all possible and enforce law and order as dictated by society. We are enabling police to have a confrontation attitude before there is a need under the guise of "safety" (theirs and/or ours depending on the situation). No person's reaction to an oncoming "encounter" with police should be fear or concern unless you are in a clear violation of laws that are endangering public safety.
If you want to advocate for an approach of respect from the citizen to the police, I wouldn't disagree but it better damn well be mutual respect. I should be respected by police just as I respect them as a condition of them having so much power in "our relationship".
-
Jockey, here's the problem I have with your overall position on this. You are treating it as fact that this is racism when we have no idea if that is true or not. This is just as likely really bad policing which is really bad and reason for outrage. I'm with you that it probably was racial motivated but based on the militarization and entitlement of police officers I've encountered I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't them just being bad at their jobs/bad attitude.
Regardless of whether racism was involved or they are just really bad at their jobs it still doesn't raise to the level of it being ok to label a group of people by a highly derogatory term. If we're going to fix these types of problems we're going to need allies from the communities that view the use of pigs as highly inflammatory.
Again, THIS. He has made the conclusion this is racism and has no idea if it is. This is part of the problem with dialogue in this country. People judging others without knowing intent. The same with running the mugshot the other day, immediately labeled by some as racist. No one knows that.
-
Again, THIS. He has made the conclusion this is racism and has no idea if it is. This is part of the problem with dialogue in this country. People judging others without knowing intent. The same with running the mugshot the other day, immediately labeled by some as racist. No one knows that.
Counterpoint: people can draw reasonable conclusions based on the evidence at hand.
I think it’s reasonable to suggest that if Brown were white, this would have been a routine interaction that may not have even resulted in a citation.
-
Counterpoint: people can draw reasonable conclusions based on the evidence at hand.
I think it’s reasonable to suggest that if Brown were white, this would have been a routine interaction that may not have even resulted in a citation.
I agree that it's entirely reasonable and in no way do I fault anyone who assumes there is racist intent. I have trouble assuming 8 cops of mixed races were all racist, but honestly from what I've seen that's a 50/50 proposition at best. I just happen to be a significant believer in Hanlon's Razor.
-
Again, THIS. He has made the conclusion this is racism and has no idea if it is. This is part of the problem with dialogue in this country. People judging others without knowing intent. The same with running the mugshot the other day, immediately labeled by some as racist. No one knows that.
The issue seems to be the difference between intentional racism and racism resulting from the system.
Regarding the mugshot thing, worth a quick read.
http://soletstalkabout.com/post/115030414880/white-yearbook-photos-vs-black-mugshots-for-the
-
Here is the problem I have, this very attitude is what enables the bad actors within the police force. Police are public servants who's job is to engage the public positively if at all possible and enforce law and order as dictated by society. We are enabling police to have a confrontation attitude before there is a need under the guise of "safety" (theirs and/or ours depending on the situation). No person's reaction to an oncoming "encounter" with police should be fear or concern unless you are in a clear violation of laws that are endangering public safety.
If you want to advocate for an approach of respect from the citizen to the police, I wouldn't disagree but it better damn well be mutual respect. I should be respected by police just as I respect them as a condition of them having so much power in "our relationship".
they were disciplined as they should have. i think most policemen/women do respect the law as well as the guidelines and policies set forth. you seem to be reacting as if they got away with something, but i could also be mis-interpreting your post as well
-
Counterpoint: people can draw reasonable conclusions based on the evidence at hand.
I think it’s reasonable to suggest that if Brown were white, this would have been a routine interaction that may not have even resulted in a citation.
so, if brown were white(no pun intended)and refused to comply with the policemen's orders, they might have gone out for a beer together then, right? beer summit? nice try
-
they were disciplined as they should have. i think most policemen/women do respect the law as well as the guidelines and policies set forth. you seem to be reacting as if they got away with something, but i could also be mis-interpreting your post as well
I do think they "got away" with something in that at least one of those officers deserved to be fired. Police serve at the behest of citizens for the betterment of society, we have given them tremendous power over life and livelihood, with that power comes responsibility. Imagine if Mr. Brown were an up and coming lawyer or a shift worker at a manufacturing plant, this event could have resulted in him losing his job through almost no fault of his own.
In my opinion the lead officer failed in his responsibilities, there is no way that a parking citation in which the citizen was at least minimally cooperative should ever escalate to a take down and/or tazing. In this statement, it has nothing to do with race, if Mr. Brown were a mid-50s white dock worker I would have the same opinion. The police officer failed to properly wield his power in a responsible way, he should no longer have that responsibility.
There are plenty of bad cops out there who fail in the responsibility to serve the betterment of the public for all sorts of reasons (racism, bullies, power for the sake of power, etc). I almost don't care why they fail, they have failed and should have that responsibility removed.
-
so, if brown were white(no pun intended)and refused to comply with the policemen's orders, they might have gone out for a beer together then, right? beer summit? nice try
This, right here, is your problem when discussing these issues, rocket.
Obviously, there is no way of knowing for sure what would have happened if Brown had been white.
But intelligent observers of what has gone on in society for years would theorize that the white guy wouldn't have been surrounded by a dozen cops, tazed and hauled away as if he had just kidnapped the Lindbergh baby.
You might want to believe otherwise. That is up to you. Sometimes you seem to suggest that poor, downtrodden, white guys just can't catch a break any more. And you certainly seem incapable of admitting that "driving while black" (or "walking while black" or "standing while black") is a crime in the eyes of far too many cops. Not all cops. Not most cops. But far too many cops.
Until you can wrap your head around that, you will always make dopey statements like this one about the beer summit. Wow.
-
so, if brown were white(no pun intended)and refused to comply with the policemen's orders, they might have gone out for a beer together then, right? beer summit? nice try
So if your only defense is hyperbole, that shows you don't have much of a leg to stand on.
-
This, right here, is your problem when discussing these issues, rocket.
Obviously, there is no way of knowing for sure what would have happened if Brown had been white.
But intelligent observers of what has gone on in society for years would theorize that the white guy wouldn't have been surrounded by a dozen cops, tazed and hauled away as if he had just kidnapped the Lindbergh baby.
You might want to believe otherwise. That is up to you. Sometimes you seem to suggest that poor, downtrodden, white guys just can't catch a break any more. And you certainly seem incapable of admitting that "driving while black" (or "walking while black" or "standing while black") is a crime in the eyes of far too many cops. Not all cops. Not most cops. But far too many cops.
Until you can wrap your head around that, you will always make dopey statements like this one about the beer summit. Wow.
Yep. Rocket is the personification of the middle class white guy whose somehow become a victim.
-
Yep. Rocket is the personification of the middle class white guy whose somehow become a victim.
Y'all don't know what it's like ...
-
So if your only defense is hyperbole, that shows you don't have much of a leg to stand on.
now wait a second-82 just filled a post with hyperbole and you didn't have a problem with that cuz you guys wear the same uniform. dang man! my statement was half tongue in cheek and you guys get all kinds of stuff out of it. if i don't toe your line to the "t", i'm all triple k or something. i guess i need to use teal a little more often
this is where 82 should have stopped-period!
"Obviously, there is no way of knowing for sure what would have happened if Brown had been white."
have you guys ever heard of the stories where the police interaction with a minority ended well? probably not because that doesn't fit the media's narrative. i am sure there are plenty of good stories out there where-here, let's try this one-
https://www.elitedaily.com/social-news/white-cop-tommy-norman-police-black-communities/1548572
oh, and here's another-
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-32295217
but we all know that we can do this all day long and i know i am going to get jumped on again. i am by no means minimizing police-black injustices. they do happen and they are ALL very unfortunate and wrong. my neighbors-husband/wife are police in arizona. the wife is a police captain in phoenix. the husband retired from the state and is now a captain for the surprise police dept. we talk about this from their perspective a lot. yes, they cringe every time one of these come up.
do you realize how many police-minority interactions there are each day, each week...the percentage of these types(negative) are very small. yes, each one involves real people and their lives. and each one is one too many, but just as in any profession, there are going to be rogue members.
so back to 82-i do not have a problem and you are not going to guilt me into believing your way is the right way. i will end with this one in which you lost me at-
"Sometimes you seem to suggest that, downtrodden, white guys just can't catch a break any more. And you certainly seem incapable of admitting that "driving while black" (or "walking while black" or "standing while black") is a crime in the eyes of far too many cops. Not all cops. Not most cops. But far too many cops."
-
...the husband retired from the state and is now a captain for the surprise police dept...
I'm sorry...I know what you mean...but this just made me laugh. I shall resist the urge to make an inappropriate joke.
-
now wait a second-82 just filled a post with hyperbole and you didn't have a problem with that cuz you guys wear the same uniform. dang man! my statement was half tongue in cheek and you guys get all kinds of stuff out of it. if i don't toe your line to the "t", i'm all triple k or something. i guess i need to use teal a little more often
this is where 82 should have stopped-period!
"Obviously, there is no way of knowing for sure what would have happened if Brown had been white."
have you guys ever heard of the stories where the police interaction with a minority ended well? probably not because that doesn't fit the media's narrative. i am sure there are plenty of good stories out there where-here, let's try this one-
https://www.elitedaily.com/social-news/white-cop-tommy-norman-police-black-communities/1548572
oh, and here's another-
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-32295217
but we all know that we can do this all day long and i know i am going to get jumped on again. i am by no means minimizing police-black injustices. they do happen and they are ALL very unfortunate and wrong. my neighbors-husband/wife are police in arizona. the wife is a police captain in phoenix. the husband retired from the state and is now a captain for the surprise police dept. we talk about this from their perspective a lot. yes, they cringe every time one of these come up.
do you realize how many police-minority interactions there are each day, each week...the percentage of these types(negative) are very small. yes, each one involves real people and their lives. and each one is one too many, but just as in any profession, there are going to be rogue members.
so back to 82-i do not have a problem and you are not going to guilt me into believing your way is the right way. i will end with this one in which you lost me at-
"Sometimes you seem to suggest that, downtrodden, white guys just can't catch a break any more. And you certainly seem incapable of admitting that "driving while black" (or "walking while black" or "standing while black") is a crime in the eyes of far too many cops. Not all cops. Not most cops. But far too many cops."
Holding up a few good stories doesn't disprove there is a systemic problem with how many police officers interact with minorities versus white people in the same scenario.
If you don't like your arguments to be jumped on, don't make dumb arguments. It's really that simple.
-
now wait a second-82 just filled a post with hyperbole and you didn't have a problem with that cuz you guys wear the same uniform. dang man! my statement was half tongue in cheek and you guys get all kinds of stuff out of it. if i don't toe your line to the "t", i'm all triple k or something. i guess i need to use teal a little more often
this is where 82 should have stopped-period!
"Obviously, there is no way of knowing for sure what would have happened if Brown had been white."
have you guys ever heard of the stories where the police interaction with a minority ended well? probably not because that doesn't fit the media's narrative. i am sure there are plenty of good stories out there where-here, let's try this one-
https://www.elitedaily.com/social-news/white-cop-tommy-norman-police-black-communities/1548572
oh, and here's another-
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-32295217
but we all know that we can do this all day long and i know i am going to get jumped on again. i am by no means minimizing police-black injustices. they do happen and they are ALL very unfortunate and wrong. my neighbors-husband/wife are police in arizona. the wife is a police captain in phoenix. the husband retired from the state and is now a captain for the surprise police dept. we talk about this from their perspective a lot. yes, they cringe every time one of these come up.
do you realize how many police-minority interactions there are each day, each week...the percentage of these types(negative) are very small. yes, each one involves real people and their lives. and each one is one too many, but just as in any profession, there are going to be rogue members.
so back to 82-i do not have a problem and you are not going to guilt me into believing your way is the right way. i will end with this one in which you lost me at-
"Sometimes you seem to suggest that, downtrodden, white guys just can't catch a break any more. And you certainly seem incapable of admitting that "driving while black" (or "walking while black" or "standing while black") is a crime in the eyes of far too many cops. Not all cops. Not most cops. But far too many cops."
All right, rocket, you are free to live in your world of ignorant bliss.
I mean, my 92-year-old father-in-law still calls black people "coloreds" - seriously - so I get it; some dogs either can't learn new tricks or don't want to.
Have a good weekend.
-
Counterpoint: people can draw reasonable conclusions based on the evidence at hand.
I think it’s reasonable to suggest that if Brown were white, this would have been a routine interaction that may not have even resulted in a citation.
Sure, but that doesn't mean it was racist intentions either. We treat 90 year old ladies different at stores and boarding planes than 30 year old men with accents (German, American, Australian, Middle East, Honduran, doesn't matter). Teenagers are treated differently than 50 year olds (forget race, just look at age). Why? Ageism? Racism? Genderism? Situations often determine how we act, that is human nature. That might mean racism, but it doesn't make it absolute which is how he came off with his broad comments.
-
It's a term that is offensive to a large plurality of the group of people to whom it refers.
If you think using offensive terms about other groups is unacceptable, why would this be any different?
Pakuni did the heavy lifting in answering why it's a stretch to say the two offensive terms are interchangeable in their offensiveness.
One thing I would add is that working to equate arguably the most stigmatizing word in the english language that degrades a person's color (though they had no choice in the matter) with a pejorative insult of a profession in which the members have 100% choice of belonging to the group claiming offense is a fool's errand.
-
so, if brown were white(no pun intended)and refused to comply with the policemen's orders, they might have gone out for a beer together then, right? beer summit? nice try
Probably would have, but no way of knowing for sure. I see what Jockey and Sultan are saying in the main, but they are painting too broad a brush in my view. You, however, are doing the same to deny it doesn't happen percentage wise more to the minority community. There are examples of white guys receiving the same treatment of Mr. Brown, that it appears some here do not want to acknowledge, but instead believe racism is at work with Mr. Brown. At the same time, the optics of this don't look good and more likely this happens with a black man than a white man, but yes it has happened to white men also. The pronouncement of racism as the cause without knowing and slurring police officers as a group is my gripe.
-
Y'all shouldant lose sight of da fact that the sudpect coulda avoided all dis had he parked legally ta begin wit, hey?
-
Y'all shouldant lose sight of da fact that the sudpect coulda avoided all dis had he parked legally ta begin wit, hey?
So parking illegally is a tase worthy, arrest worthy act? Would you expect to get tased if you made a 2 AM Walgreen's run and parked illegally in an otherwise empty lot?
-
So parking illegally is a tase worthy, arrest worthy act? Would you expect to get tased if you made a 2 AM Walgreen's run and parked illegally in an otherwise empty lot?
See, I never said that did I? What I said was Brown could have avoid all his hardship had he simply parked legally. Is anyone going to dispute that otherwise?
#lawsmatter
-
What is the customary punishment for illegally parking in a handicapped spot? What would you expect yours to be?
#makethepunishmentfitthecrime
-
Still missing the point. Not arguing punishment here. Anyone can see the police reacted inappropriately. My point is Brown was illegally parked which led the cops to investigate the incident and it slid downhill from there.
Follow the law and none of this happens.
#alllawsmatter
-
You are missing my point. A ticket is the appropriate application of the law. The officers did not react proportionately.
-
What is the customary punishment for illegally parking in a handicapped spot? What would you expect yours to be?
#makethepunishmentfitthecrime
Brown is lucky he *only* got tasered when you think about it.
-
You are missing my point. A ticket is the appropriate application of the law. The officers did not react proportionately.
Actually, I think we both understand each other. But, I contend the entire incident was avoidable. Brown's dumb luck was the cops happened to drive by at the same time he was illegally parked. Yes, I know it happens all the time without a ticket being issued whether you're white, black, blue, or green.
-
I think we do.
-
Still missing the point. Not arguing punishment here. Anyone can see the police reacted inappropriately. My point is Brown was illegally parked which led the cops to investigate the incident and it slid downhill from there.
Follow the law and none of this happens.
#alllawsmatter
I have been pulled over many times for driving while black. I just accept it for what it is. That said I try to follow the law so I don't inadvertently create situations like this one. Common sense. The lack of personal self discipline among many in my community is the source of a lot of problems.
-
Still missing the point. Not arguing punishment here. Anyone can see the police reacted inappropriately. My point is Brown was illegally parked which led the cops to investigate the incident and it slid downhill from there.
Follow the law and none of this happens.
The cops, as representatives of the state, have a greater responsibility in this circumstance. This is just blaming the victim bullsh*t.
-
Holding up a few good stories doesn't disprove there is a systemic problem with how many police officers interact with minorities versus white people in the same scenario.
If you don't like your arguments to be jumped on, don't make dumb arguments. It's really that simple.
you really are one arrogant sonuvagun ain't ya? good thing you weren't a cop-eyn'er?
-
All right, rocket, you are free to live in your world of ignorant bliss.
I mean, my 92-year-old father-in-law still calls black people "coloreds" - seriously - so I get it; some dogs either can't learn new tricks or don't want to.
Have a good weekend.
why is my world "ignorant bliss" and yours is...what? don't get what the father in law thing nor the dog thing has to do with my interpretation of the situation, but maybe ya ought to sic sully on him. have him read a few posts from you and sully and he will be calling all african americans "sir" and "ms."
-
why is my world "ignorant bliss" and yours is...what? don't get what the father in law thing nor the dog thing has to do with my interpretation of the situation, but maybe ya ought to sic sully on him. have him read a few posts from you and sully and he will be calling all african americans "sir" and "ms."
Let me tell y'all what it's like
Being male, middle-class and white
It's a bitch, if you don't believe
Listen up to my new CD
(Sha-mon)
I got sh*t runnin' throught my brain
It's so intense that I can't explain
All alone in my white-boy pain
Shake your booty while the band complains
-
you really are one arrogant sonuvagun ain't ya? good thing you weren't a cop-eyn'er?
Ok. I laughed.
-
For the record, the first cop is a family friend. Someone I think is of high character, and someone who served in the military. He is someone I like and respect. That said, he crossed a line that did not need to be crossed. Do have agreed with 4ever though, Brown decided to make decision that he is bigger than the law we all follow. In my darkest moment I would never take a handicapped spot, let alone two.
Imo, I think we all agree that the cops screwed up. Only issue is what % mood of blame goes to Brown. I think he gets 10%, which is based on being immature on the parking choice.
-
Thank you, Mike. I will take your advice. My point was to express anger and to try to make people angry. Your response has given me a good perspective about the use of certain words (and the differing perceptions of them) - just as I would expect from you.
But I did find a lot of humor in some of the responses. Some of those who accused me of attacking all police while continuing to support a man who is trying to tear down and de-legitimize law enforcement institutions in this country were quite fascinating.
Jockey/Brand X,
Over the years I have read your anti police posts and I really don't have the time to go back and locate each of your numerous quotes, but some I recall were "F*ck the Cops (numerous times), the Pigs reference, Thugs, and I seem to recall you mentioning they ought to be placed in some kind of camps. The outrage that is inside you regarding law enforcement is just mesmerizing to me. You see, I have bit my tongue over the years, just reading these comments over police matters, whether it was the Ferguson incident, or Baltimore, or now this Brown matter. The reason is that I spent 33 years in law enforcement, and maybe I am the only law enforcement guy on this board or as you see it, Scoop Pig/Thug. I never got myself involved in any of the discussion, albeit I might have mentioned background on affidavits, criminal complaints, grand juries and various court information, but mainly stayed back and read how people feel and their reactions to the incidents that make the news media.
I am not going to provide you a resume, but I have witnessed every crime imaginable to mankind. I have seen almost every cause of death to a human being that is possible. I have been shot at and yes, in 2000, I was involved in a shooting in which the suspect was killed. I was cleared entirely by a shooting review team and a county grand jury. I am a white male and the subject was a black male, but race was not an issue there, as you may think it is with every law enforcement encounter. The suspect had kidnapped a couple and taped them to chairs in a basement, attempting to get their ATM pinched. The male victim provided the number and the suspect then shot them both in the head and left. The male died and the female survived a gunshot wound through her eye, and was found shortly thereafter and lived. Provided identification of subject and we located him a few weeks later when a shootout occurred during apprehension. Enough of that, just wanted to get it out there, in case there's a snide reply about never having gone through such an incident.
You said above that find humor in some of the responses, yet I don't see anybody laughing. To be honest, you have no clue as to what happens on the street every day. OK, your response will be all the videos/body cams incidents that have come out over the years, but they only translate to less than 1% of the interactions with law enforcement. Yes, there are bad officers and there are a lot of officers with bad tempers, but the majority are there to help and service the community. Just this morning, there was a segment on NBC about an officer who rescued a substitute teacher in the Santa Fe shooting. The teacher had been shot at least three times, the officer despite taking fire, ran and carried her away to safety and she lived. Her husband spoke before some state council hearing, with the officer present, breaking down in tears and called him a hero for saving his wife's life. Maybe they will show that officers body camera footage. Doubt it, because not news worthy or racially news motivating.
I truly hope that one day you will not require the services of an officer, whether its a break in at your residence, an auto accident, an assault on a family member, etc. because its only a matter of time before an interaction will happen. I know you won't call them a Pig or a Thug while they are trying to assist you or a family member in need. I have been called almost every name in the book, but the Pig comment is just over the top.
Don't really want to continue any further, but you have very right to vent about law enforcement, racism, and the likes, but maybe you can discontinue the F*ck the Cops and Pigs comments. There is no humor in that.
-
All right, rocket, you are free to live in your world of ignorant bliss.
I mean, my 92-year-old father-in-law still calls black people "coloreds" - seriously - so I get it; some dogs either can't learn new tricks or don't want to.
Have a good weekend.
a close elderly (mid90s) relative of mine still refers to Asians as "Orientals". When I cringe and try to correct her, she gets mad and brings up the long defunct Northwest Orient Airlines. The world is clearly not going her way.
On a serious note, '82, I wonder if in your media position you ever had an interaction with a high ranking NAACP official? I still don't know why they never changed their name. Not at all excusing your FIL, but you could see how some would use the NAACP excuse to continue to use the term "colored".
-
Jockey/Brand X,
Over the years I have read your anti police posts and I really don't have the time to go back and locate each of your numerous quotes, but some I recall were "F*ck the Cops (numerous times), the Pigs reference, Thugs, and I seem to recall you mentioning they ought to be placed in some kind of camps. The outrage that is inside you regarding law enforcement is just mesmerizing to me. You see, I have bit my tongue over the years, just reading these comments over police matters, whether it was the Ferguson incident, or Baltimore, or now this Brown matter. The reason is that I spent 33 years in law enforcement, and maybe I am the only law enforcement guy on this board or as you see it, Scoop Pig/Thug. I never got myself involved in any of the discussion, albeit I might have mentioned background on affidavits, criminal complaints, grand juries and various court information, but mainly stayed back and read how people feel and their reactions to the incidents that make the news media.
I am not going to provide you a resume, but I have witnessed every crime imaginable to mankind. I have seen almost every cause of death to a human being that is possible. I have been shot at and yes, in 2000, I was involved in a shooting in which the suspect was killed. I was cleared entirely by a shooting review team and a county grand jury. I am a white male and the subject was a black male, but race was not an issue there, as you may think it is with every law enforcement encounter. The suspect had kidnapped a couple and taped them to chairs in a basement, attempting to get their ATM pinched. The male victim provided the number and the suspect then shot them both in the head and left. The male died and the female survived a gunshot wound through her eye, and was found shortly thereafter and lived. Provided identification of subject and we located him a few weeks later when a shootout occurred during apprehension. Enough of that, just wanted to get it out there, in case there's a snide reply about never having gone through such an incident.
You said above that find humor in some of the responses, yet I don't see anybody laughing. To be honest, you have no clue as to what happens on the street every day. OK, your response will be all the videos/body cams incidents that have come out over the years, but they only translate to less than 1% of the interactions with law enforcement. Yes, there are bad officers and there are a lot of officers with bad tempers, but the majority are there to help and service the community. Just this morning, there was a segment on NBC about an officer who rescued a substitute teacher in the Santa Fe shooting. The teacher had been shot at least three times, the officer despite taking fire, ran and carried her away to safety and she lived. Her husband spoke before some state council hearing, with the officer present, breaking down in tears and called him a hero for saving his wife's life. Maybe they will show that officers body camera footage. Doubt it, because not news worthy or racially news motivating.
I truly hope that one day you will not require the services of an officer, whether its a break in at your residence, an auto accident, an assault on a family member, etc. because its only a matter of time before an interaction will happen. I know you won't call them a Pig or a Thug while they are trying to assist you or a family member in need. I have been called almost every name in the book, but the Pig comment is just over the top.
Don't really want to continue any further, but you have very right to vent about law enforcement, racism, and the likes, but maybe you can discontinue the F*ck the Cops and Pigs comments. There is no humor in that.
thank you nyg for your service to the community-you were exactly the example i had in mind when trying to argue my point. there are tens of thousands of police interactions each day across the country. they are almost always good or successful interactions within the guidelines and policies and the laws set forth. you guys go into a city, a neighborhood ready for the unknown, which could occur at any moment without notice. cops have been ambushed just because they are cops. a seemingly benign incident can turn deadly without warning.
i have heard that being involved in a shooting is a very traumatic experience, not what some cop hating people make it out to be-some trigger happy fill in the blank hating ...too many people have minimized this way too often and yet, each time you drive off to work, you truly do not know if you will be returning home to your family. not much unlike going in to war-thank you! and thank you for your response here-i hope it opened up at least a few eyes here, of a reality of the profession from the front lines rather than the media sensationalizing the victims
-
Actually, I think we both understand each other. But, I contend the entire incident was avoidable. Brown's dumb luck was the cops happened to drive by at the same time he was illegally parked. Yes, I know it happens all the time without a ticket being issued whether you're white, black, blue, or green.
at 2 am in an area rife with prostitution, shootings, robbery, assault, etc...these are the types of situations that lead to happening upon larger crimes. although someone within the group of police should have de-escalated the response, brown could have helped his own case some. the police were disciplined. some have called for firing. that still may come,
now take all the "negatively" reported incidents involving police and put them up against all incidents combined and you still have only very few negative in comparison. many of the incidents at first reported to be negative on the police side, turned out to be justified. all people remember is the negative side of the story. exoneration, meaning both sides of the story were realized and the police were found to have followed protocol.
correct me if i'm wrong nyg, but many of the cop-haters seem to think you guys love this chit, going in to unknown situations and busting the chit out people, shooting, emptying your clips and re-loading...just like on tv eyn'a? my understanding is that much of the reaction is adrenalin, fight or flight with some fear. but bottom line is you are doing all this to save someone's life. whether it be your partners, a victim or heaven forbid, your own. many of the police involved in shootings have a hard time, and rightly so, going back into active service
-
Jockey/Brand X,
Over the years I have read your anti police posts and I really don't have the time to go back and locate each of your numerous quotes, but some I recall were "F*ck the Cops (numerous times), the Pigs reference, Thugs, and I seem to recall you mentioning they ought to be placed in some kind of camps. The outrage that is inside you regarding law enforcement is just mesmerizing to me. You see, I have bit my tongue over the years, just reading these comments over police matters, whether it was the Ferguson incident, or Baltimore, or now this Brown matter. The reason is that I spent 33 years in law enforcement, and maybe I am the only law enforcement guy on this board or as you see it, Scoop Pig/Thug. I never got myself involved in any of the discussion, albeit I might have mentioned background on affidavits, criminal complaints, grand juries and various court information, but mainly stayed back and read how people feel and their reactions to the incidents that make the news media.
I am not going to provide you a resume, but I have witnessed every crime imaginable to mankind. I have seen almost every cause of death to a human being that is possible. I have been shot at and yes, in 2000, I was involved in a shooting in which the suspect was killed. I was cleared entirely by a shooting review team and a county grand jury. I am a white male and the subject was a black male, but race was not an issue there, as you may think it is with every law enforcement encounter. The suspect had kidnapped a couple and taped them to chairs in a basement, attempting to get their ATM pinched. The male victim provided the number and the suspect then shot them both in the head and left. The male died and the female survived a gunshot wound through her eye, and was found shortly thereafter and lived. Provided identification of subject and we located him a few weeks later when a shootout occurred during apprehension. Enough of that, just wanted to get it out there, in case there's a snide reply about never having gone through such an incident.
You said above that find humor in some of the responses, yet I don't see anybody laughing. To be honest, you have no clue as to what happens on the street every day. OK, your response will be all the videos/body cams incidents that have come out over the years, but they only translate to less than 1% of the interactions with law enforcement. Yes, there are bad officers and there are a lot of officers with bad tempers, but the majority are there to help and service the community. Just this morning, there was a segment on NBC about an officer who rescued a substitute teacher in the Santa Fe shooting. The teacher had been shot at least three times, the officer despite taking fire, ran and carried her away to safety and she lived. Her husband spoke before some state council hearing, with the officer present, breaking down in tears and called him a hero for saving his wife's life. Maybe they will show that officers body camera footage. Doubt it, because not news worthy or racially news motivating.
I truly hope that one day you will not require the services of an officer, whether its a break in at your residence, an auto accident, an assault on a family member, etc. because its only a matter of time before an interaction will happen. I know you won't call them a Pig or a Thug while they are trying to assist you or a family member in need. I have been called almost every name in the book, but the Pig comment is just over the top.
Don't really want to continue any further, but you have very right to vent about law enforcement, racism, and the likes, but maybe you can discontinue the F*ck the Cops and Pigs comments. There is no humor in that.
I joke a lot on this site, but I think most posters realize when I'm serious as well. In 12 years of posting I haven't read a more moving, revealing, and succint post from anyone. Nyg, I admire you and I am proud that we are fellow Marquette alums. To me, you are The Difference. Bravo!
-
What is the customary punishment for illegally parking in a handicapped spot? What would you expect yours to be?
#makethepunishmentfitthecrime
Towed
-
...all the videos/body cams incidents that have come out over the years, but they only translate to less than 1% of the interactions with law enforcement. ...
Don't really want to continue any further, but you have very right to vent about law enforcement, racism, and the likes, but maybe you can discontinue the F*ck the Cops and Pigs comments. There is no humor in that.
+1 to all of this.
-
nyg
Thank you for the outstanding post. I wish you had shared this earlier with Jockey and hopefully shut him up. While his posts greatly offend me, I have to say, your post really moved me. The one wonderful thing to come out of jockey’s poison, is your sharing your life experiences with us.
-
Thank you all for the quick response thoughts. Like I said, I have been on this board for 11 years and like to follow MU hoop information. I venture to the Superbar and enjoy reading about the various topics that come up and the passion some of you have on these topics, even though some posters are out of their minds, but still enjoyable.
I never "tooted my horn" or whatever terminology because this is not the place to do it. As Tower/Brew can attest to, we could spend days telling war stories, but they don't. Its kept in house, unless asked. I just want the Scoop community to realize 99% of law enforcement are extremely professional and will go out of their way to help you and your loved ones when in need. The bad incidents are the ones that get publicized and shed just a terrible light. Its a very, very though profession these days. Enough of this.. Thank you again and I'll just get back to normal thread viewing.
Rocketman, I will end in this. It is no where near anything on TV, not even close. I know some of you enjoy Live PD, which is pretty good showing the street officers and their interaction, but the officers know they are on camera and lets say are pretty nice to the knuckleheads in certain situations. Still a fun watch. As Tower and Brew can verify, its not all Chicago Fire for them.
If you want the most realistic television program ever produced and one of the highest rated by critics, watch the HBO series The Wire.
-
Police have been corrupt as a matter of practice. $21,000,000 has been paid out by the city of Milwaukee over the last 2 1/2 years for police misconduct. Many cities have paid out much more. We, as citizens, must let them know this conduct is no longer acceptable no matter what the climate is in the country. Ever.
I appreciate your kind words as my son starts his career in law enforcement. I’ll be sure to let him know how bad and horrible of a choice he’s made.
-
Honestly, the problem is that there was a confrontation at all. The ticket should have been given and that should be the end of it. What followed was a ton of male bravado that created a stupid situation.
If Brown has a problem with the ticket, he contests it in a court of law. If they cops walk away there is no problem.
Instead we see what we see. Police escalating a situation where they needed to be de-escalating. This is the result of militarizing our police forces.
I'll leave the rest of you to debate to whom police escalation primarily affects... but... its black people.
-
real
Good luck to your son. I provided a long list of violations to jockey over his long career.
-
Thank you all for the quick response thoughts. Like I said, I have been on this board for 11 years and like to follow MU hoop information. I venture to the Superbar and enjoy reading about the various topics that come up and the passion some of you have on these topics, even though some posters are out of their minds, but still enjoyable.
I never "tooted my horn" or whatever terminology because this is not the place to do it. As Tower/Brew can attest to, we could spend days telling war stories, but they don't. Its kept in house, unless asked. I just want the Scoop community to realize 99% of law enforcement are extremely professional and will go out of their way to help you and your loved ones when in need. The bad incidents are the ones that get publicized and shed just a terrible light. Its a very, very though profession these days. Enough of this.. Thank you again and I'll just get back to normal thread viewing.
Rocketman, I will end in this. It is no where near anything on TV, not even close. I know some of you enjoy Live PD, which is pretty good showing the street officers and their interaction, but the officers know they are on camera and lets say are pretty nice to the knuckleheads in certain situations. Still a fun watch. As Tower and Brew can verify, its not all Chicago Fire for them.
If you want the most realistic television program ever produced and one of the highest rated by critics, watch the HBO series The Wire.
nyg ... you make an eloquent and heartfelt defense of your profession. I'm not a cop, but have worked with the law enforcement community for much of my career. I've come to know and respect many cops, some of whom I now socialize with and consider friends. I respect and appreciate what they, and you, do.
That said, I'm a little troubled by the constant trotting out of statements like "the vast majority of interactions are positive" and the like. Not only does that seem to minimize the profound impact of the negative interactions, regardless of how rare, but it seems to imply that there is an acceptable number of bad actors in your profession.
I mean, I get it, every profession has bad actors. But whenever we read a story about a teacher sexually abusing a child or a lawyer swindling clients, no one rushes out to say that "the vast majority of lawyer-client interactions are positive" or "99 percent of teachers aren't pedophiles." That goes without saying. Cops don't get extra credit for having positive interactions with the people they serve. That's the baseline expectation, right?
I 100 percent agree with you on the use of disrespectful terms for your profession, but it would be worth remembering that those terms - and much of the distrust of your profession - haven't been created out of thin air, or some sort media-fueled mass hysteria. It reflects the behavior of some members of your profession.
It's understandable and laudable that you and others want to defend the millions of good people in your line of work from being unfairly impugned for the actions of others. And yet perhaps the profession as a whole needs to spend just as much time and energy weeding out those bad people rather than, sadly, covering up for them as has historically been the case.
-
NYG, I appreciate you and your service. Having worked closely with the police the last 28 years, I believe every word of what you say. And I truly believe with all of my heart that 99% of officers get it right 99% of the time. I love cops. A former police chief in my town, over a cold one, said to me "the difference between you guys (firefighters) and us is this. You guys kick in a door and go rushing into a house and you get called heroes. We kick in a door and go rushing into a house and get sued." There is a lot of truth there. The problems develop when the police kick in the wrong door.
So many decisions have to be made in the blink of an eye. Under duress. I don't fault the police officer who shoots the kid with the realistic looking gun pointing at them. I have stood next to an officer in tears praying that his brethren find the gun he swore he saw before he shot the guy. (they did). The same cop thanked me for helping him find out who shot a kid who clammed up and wouldn't say anything about who shot him. I climbed in the back of the ambulance, left the door open, started engaging the kid, swearing up a storm with him and while we were bonding in a sea of profanity he let out the name of the punk-a$$ed b**** who shot him. That cop bought me a beer, too. I get it and I come as close to understanding it as a non-cop can.
But these all-too human heroes make mistakes, too. The one in the current episode we are discussing escalated the situation far beyond what it needed to be. The kid parked illegally in a nearly empty parking lot at 2 in the morning. Ticket. Warning. Not tasing, arresting. There could be a thousand other reasons why it happened. But the optics are a white cop tased an unarmed black man for parking in a handicapped spot.
-
nyg:
I got a lot out of your post. I am sure the job is difficult. I know I couldn't be a cop. Thanks for doing what you do.
I do also agree with points others are making about how the cops at the Brown scene did not do their jobs properly. For example, I thought Pakuni made a very good point when he said:
every profession has bad actors. But whenever we read a story about a teacher sexually abusing a child or a lawyer swindling clients, no one rushes out to say that "the vast majority of lawyer-client interactions are positive" or "99 percent of teachers aren't pedophiles." That goes without saying. Cops don't get extra credit for having positive interactions with the people they serve. That's the baseline expectation, right?
I hate seeing Scoop divided (as some have) into "cop-haters" and "cop-respecters." I certainly do not consider myself a cop-hater, yet I do think it is hard to defend the cops in the Brown case and in some others. As always, regardless of the subject or issue, I try to look at each case as it happens, and I try not to have knee-jerk reactions.
Anyway, I won't go on. I've said what I've had to earlier.
My final two words to you are ones I think we all can agree on:
Keep safe.
-
On a serious note, '82, I wonder if in your media position you ever had an interaction with a high ranking NAACP official? I still don't know why they never changed their name. Not at all excusing your FIL, but you could see how some would use the NAACP excuse to continue to use the term "colored".
I was a sportswriter, so obviously I had a bazillion conversations with black athletes and coaches. However, I never had any kind of relationship or conversation with anybody from the NAACP itself.
But sure, I have heard the excuse that, "Hey, COLORED is right in their organization's name!" Frankly, if I were an NAACP poobah, I'd change the organization's name. But that's just me.
-
Jockey, here's the problem I have with your overall position on this. You are treating it as fact that this is racism when we have no idea if that is true or not. This is just as likely really bad policing which is really bad and reason for outrage. I'm with you that it probably was racial motivated but based on the militarization and entitlement of police officers I've encountered I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't them just being bad at their jobs/bad attitude.
Regardless of whether racism was involved or they are just really bad at their jobs it still doesn't raise to the level of it being ok to label a group of people by a highly derogatory term. If we're going to fix these types of problems we're going to need allies from the communities that view the use of pigs as highly inflammatory.
I agree with all of this, Eng. But talk by police is cheap. Only an end to these actions will solve the issue. Blacks want to be protected from crime just like anyone else. But in many cases, those who are supposed to be protecting them are the ones who are engaging in violent criminal behavior.
I really do try to keep an open mind when I see videos of cops taking down a suspect. In my younger days, I met a guy and two girls who were in the academy and they were talking about how they learned to take someone down. I told them they were dreamers and they could not take me down if I didn't want them to. Long story short, we went to the guys apartment and I let them try to subdue me. They couldn't do it even without me throwing punches (this was a "friendly" exercise.
Point is, if the police need to take down a suspect who does not want to be arrested, it will be violent and if seen on its own, will look like a criminal assault.
My problem has always been cases like Brown or the cases where guys are kicked and beaten after being subdues and cuffed. That is true criminal behavior just as if you were jumped by a bunch of gang members on the street.
-
I never "tooted my horn" or whatever terminology because this is not the place to do it. As Tower/Brew can attest to, we could spend days telling war stories, but they don't. Its kept in house, unless asked. I just want the Scoop community to realize 99% of law enforcement are extremely professional and will go out of their way to help you and your loved ones when in need. The bad incidents are the ones that get publicized and shed just a terrible light. Its a very, very though profession these days. Enough of this.. Thank you again and I'll just get back to normal thread viewing.
I agree that the vast majority are very professional, & the vast majority of calls public servants go on are fairly straight forward. It's what happens in the small percentage of calls that go sideways when individuals are called on to make split-second decisions. Sometimes even the best of people can make a bad decision. In a world where everything is under the microscope (or on camera), it's not easy.
Honestly, I think the case of where to start with reforming situations like this is in training. When you are in a profession where the vast majority of your time is spent dealing with the public, it would help massively for more time to be spent on deescalation, how to deal with individuals that may be suffering from mental illness or other maladies, & other unpredictable things public servants come across.
In my own line of work, I can attest we spend a lot more training time preparing to fight fires than we do dealing with the public, despite the stark reality that the vast majority of our time is spent providing medical services. Similarly, from what I understand, police spend a lot more time in weapons training than they do learning how to talk to the members of the community in tense situations. We could all be better at dealing with the public, & that video underscores that. I hope we see something positive come of it.
-
The lack of personal self discipline among many in my community is the source of a lot of problems.
Bill Cosby would frequently say words to that effect. The other you have in common with Bill is your desire to get woman impaired and have sex with them.
-
Bill Cosby would frequently say words to that effect. The other you have in common with Bill is your desire to get woman impaired and have sex with them.
BWAHHA HAHHA HAAA
-
I agree that the vast majority are very professional, & the vast majority of calls public servants go on are fairly straight forward. It's what happens in the small percentage of calls that go sideways when individuals are called on to make split-second decisions. Sometimes even the best of people can make a bad decision. In a world where everything is under the microscope (or on camera), it's not easy.
Very smart post. When any of us makes a bad decision, it can be minimized by a full, immediate apology. I think that is what is missing in cases like Brown's. We didn't need the Police Dept's apology. We needed one from the officers involved. If these officers had gone to Buck's practice the next day and fully apologized, this thread would not even exist.
-
Actually, I think we both understand each other. But, I contend the entire incident was avoidable. Brown's dumb luck was the cops happened to drive by at the same time he was illegally parked. Yes, I know it happens all the time without a ticket being issued whether you're white, black, blue, or green.
yo doc, thank God we don't see all the mis-steps by all the dentists being plastered on page one, EYN'a?
-next thing ya know, medpro will be issuing all of us body cams
(teal if this riles anyone the wrong way)
there are close to, if not over 1 million law enforcement personnel with varying degrees of arrest power. to expect all these people, with all their interactions day in and day out to get it perfect every time is unrealistic to say the least. yes it is very unfortunate. yes, every bad occurrence is especially bad for those involved. i believe an improvement would be for all police be more vigilant of each other and not to be afraid to call out the bad behavior of their peers. in the end, one suffers, they all suffer. in today's day and age, we are utilizing more and better technology to get it right more often. to get it right ALL THE TIME is unrealistic! progress toward perfection should be the goal. with over a million police involved every day, there are going to be bad actors and mistakes. hell, even NASA has made mistakes
-
Very smart post. When any of us makes a bad decision, it can be minimized by a full, immediate apology. I think that is what is missing in cases like Brown's. We didn't need the Police Dept's apology. We needed one from the officers involved. If these officers had gone to Buck's practice the next day and fully apologized, this thread would not even exist.
I think you need to apologize, too.
-
yo doc, thank God we don't see all the mis-steps by all the dentists being plastered on page one, EYN'a?
Regarding this, every public servant should know this. On day one of my fire academy, the instructors told us "yesterday, if you got a DUI, no one cared. Today, the front page newspaper headline will say 'Milwaukee firefighter arrested.'" That just comes with the occupation.
-
Jockey/Brand X,
Don't really want to continue any further, but you have very right to vent about law enforcement, racism, and the likes, but maybe you can discontinue the F*ck the Cops and Pigs comments. There is no humor in that.
I'm glad you and others like you are out there. No profession is short of a few bad apples. Police, fire, politicians, ditch diggers, morticians, dentists, basketball coaches, teachers, lawyers, HR, marketing, programmers and everyone in between.
I wouldn't want your job in today's world with social media if you paid me $500K a year. It isn't worth it. Things can be misconstrued so easily. Thank you for your service to your community.
-
I think you need to apologize, too.
dittos to that, but judging from his responses, i don't think he gets it. he is one tough dude to bring down, without throwing punches of course ?-(
-
I think you need to apologize, too.
For what? I did not attack the police. I attacked a handful of thugs who wanted to hassle a man for the crime of being black. I would think that every decent person would be upset when this happens.
You don't like my language? I understand that. I meant to be harsh. But don't lie that I hate police just so you can make me your whipping boy.
-
You are one miserable SOB. How can you tolerate living in your skin?
-
I think you need to apologize, too.
Calling for apologies?
100 percent Chico's confirmation.
-
For what? I did not attack the police. I attacked a handful of thugs who wanted to hassle a man for the crime of being black. I would think that every decent person would be upset when this happens.
You don't like my language? I understand that. I meant to be harsh. But don't lie that I hate police just so you can make me your whipping boy.
I found your comments offensive.
-
I found your comments offensive.
I can't argue with that. They were.
Just as "thoughts and Prayers" won't stop school shootings, saying that police "over-reacted" will not stop the abuses like the one that Brown faced.
-
Calling for apologies?
100 percent Chico's confirmation.
Jockey said an immediate and full apology was required. I guess that makes him a 100% chicos.
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=56297.msg1025686#msg1025686
I agree with Jockey, they (the MKE police department) should have and for the same reason Jockey should apologize for his offensive remarks.
-
Jockey said an immediate and full apology was required. I guess that makes him a 100% chicos.
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=56297.msg1025686#msg1025686
I agree with Jockey, they (the MKE police department) should have and for the same reason Jockey should apologize for his offensive remarks.
Ok, Jamie
-
I can't argue with that. They were.
Just as "thoughts and Prayers" won't stop school shootings, saying that police "over-reacted" will not stop the abuses like the one that Brown faced.
Your broad brush is as bad as all other broad brushes
-
..But whenever we read a story about a teacher sexually abusing a child or a lawyer swindling clients, no one rushes out to say that "the vast majority of lawyer-client interactions are positive" or "99 percent of teachers aren't pedophiles." That goes without saying. Cops don't get extra credit for having positive interactions with the people they serve. That's the baseline expectation, right?
This all depends on what profession is getting painted with a broad brush. Few want to throw all teachers under the bus because 1 of 10000 of them will have a sexual relationship with a minor student .. so yeah, you're correct, no one needs to rush out and say "99% of teachers aren't pedophiles." -- But when an incident goes sideways for a cop, indeed, their whole profession is eagerly protested by chunks of the population.
Mix law enforcement, bad actors, constant physical and verbal evasion, the need for snap decisions, not to mention a gun culture together, and no one should be under the delusion that 100% of all interactions will have perfect outcomes. Train and strive for it, yes. Realize it's a toxic stew with an error rate that indeed creates a need to defend those who enforce the law when the inevitable occurs.
So, yes, I do give extra credit for good policing interactions, especially in this age as disrespect for law enforcement trends upwards.
-
I can't argue with that. They were.
Just as "thoughts and Prayers" won't stop school shootings, saying that police "over-reacted" will not stop the abuses like the one that Brown faced.
"thoughts and prayers" aren't really meant to stop anything. they're meant to let people know that they are thinking of them, praying for them to help them cope. whether or not they mean it or not is a different subject and not really for anyone else to decide but for that person.
most reasonable people who admit to making offensive comments don't double down. if you ever call the police and they knew your feelings about them...they would still help you...think about that one
-
And? You treat people who hate dentists all of the time.
-
Ok, Jamie
I cannot wait to tell my wife and kids my new name. Ha ha :D
-
And? You treat people who hate dentists all of the time.
i do have the ability to dismiss(fire) patients who have irrevocably harmed the patient-doctor relationship. there is a proper procedure to follow, but i have done it many times. we agree to see said patient for 30 days for emergencies only while they seek the care of another dentist. we agree to send any and all pertinent patient records to their new dentist...gladly, may i add
-
I cannot wait to tell my wife and kids my new name. Ha ha :D
You can tell her it is spelled H-O-O-P-A-L-O-O-P
-
You can tell her it is spelled H-O-O-P-A-L-O-O-P
Other than the strikingly similar tone speech and views of warriordad and Chico's do we actually have any proof they're the same person? I admit I was convinced they were but it seems he'd have something truly wrong with him to commit this hard to not being Chico's.
-
This all depends on what profession is getting painted with a broad brush. Few want to throw all teachers under the bus because 1 of 10000 of them will have a sexual relationship with a minor student .. so yeah, you're correct, no one needs to rush out and say "99% of teachers aren't pedophiles." -- But when an incident goes sideways for a cop, indeed, their whole profession is eagerly protested by chunks of the population.
Respectfully, I believe you're wrong here. Most people who protest police shootings and the like are not "protesting the whole profession" any more than those taking a knee during the anthem are protesting a flag. They're protesting the misconduct committed members of that profession and the historical lack of consequence to those guilty of said misconduct.
This is an unfortunate rhetorical trick played by those who don't like the protests. Shift the narrative from "they're protesting police misconduct" to "they're protesting ALL COPS." Shift the narrative from "NFL players are protesting racial injustice" to "NFL players are protesting the flag."
And yeah, I'm sure you can find an example of someone protesting ALL COPS. Those people are the exception.
Mix law enforcement, bad actors, constant physical and verbal evasion, the need for snap decisions, not to mention a gun culture together, and no one should be under the delusion that 100% of all interactions will have perfect outcomes. Train and strive for it, yes. Realize it's a toxic stew with an error rate that indeed creates a need to defend those who enforce the law when the inevitable occurs.
What, in your mind, is the difference between an "error" and misconduct?
So, yes, I do give extra credit for good policing interactions, especially in this age as disrespect for law enforcement trends upwards.
Uhhh .....
It is a time of intense scrutiny for American police officers, an era that FBI Director James B. Comey recently called “uniquely difficult” during a speech to police chiefs. Many people in and around law enforcement would agree with his assessment. Police officers, retired and current, as well as their relatives, have said in interviews since last year they feel as if officers are disparaged, targeted and vilified amid years of protests over how authorities use deadly force. And throughout the presidential campaign, Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, has repeatedly assailed what he calls a lack of respect for police.
Yet despite all of this, if you ask Americans how they feel about their local police, people say they have more respect for them than they have in almost half a century.
A Gallup poll released this week found that a little more than three in four Americans (76 percent) reported having “a great deal” of respect for the police who patrol their communities, a significant uptick over last year and the highest share reported to Gallup since 1967.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/10/25/american-respect-for-police-reaches-highest-level-in-50-years/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3de23ea1f123
-
Respectfully, I believe you're wrong here. Most people who protest police shootings and the like are not "protesting the whole profession" any more than those taking a knee during the anthem are protesting a flag. They're protesting the misconduct committed members of that profession and the historical lack of consequence to those guilty of said misconduct.
This is an unfortunate rhetorical trick played by those who don't like the protests. Shift the narrative from "they're protesting police misconduct" to "they're protesting ALL COPS." Shift the narrative from "NFL players are protesting racial injustice" to "NFL players are protesting the flag."
And yeah, I'm sure you can find an example of someone protesting ALL COPS. Those people are the exception.
What, in your mind, is the difference between an "error" and misconduct?
Uhhh .....
...
Yet despite all of this, if you ask Americans how they feel about their local police, people say they have more respect for them than they have in almost half a century.
A Gallup poll released this week found that a little more than three in four Americans (76 percent) reported having “a great deal” of respect for the police who patrol their communities, a significant uptick over last year and the highest share reported to Gallup since 1967.[/i]
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/10/25/american-respect-for-police-reaches-highest-level-in-50-years/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3de23ea1f123
Indeed, we disagree. No doubt, the concept that there's a desired spin on the protests as you suggest (protesting all cops vs. incident(s)) there is enough of both types to be more than relevant -- and I don't believe, as you say "the exception." (But what do I, or you, know.)
While the article you linked to shows respect for police at an all time high, I imagine you are well aware of why. The graph shows respect ratings from 1965 to today with it hovering in the low 60s, and yet it spikes over the 1-2 years. Since recent "policing" isn't doing anything materially different to warrant such a prideful surge, I think we can both agree on the reason for this recent spike: Our political climate.
Just as more people who are furious with police incidents, there are more people who tell pollsters they are respectful, primarily due to the distaste of watching people protest, not to to mention ~half our population with rampant jingoism, rising to protect their side, their flag, their tribe.
I'd love to hear nyg's take on whether he believes law enforcement is more or less respected in the past decade.
-
Other than the strikingly similar tone speech and views of warriordad and Chico's do we actually have any proof they're the same person? I admit I was convinced they were but it seems he'd have something truly wrong with him to commit this hard to not being Chico's.
That pretty much proves it's the Bondsman. The same guy that has gone off on the mods repeatedly. The guy who desperately hides his identity with every new screen name but can't help but have his real self shine through. The guy that spent months with the Chico's/Hoopaloop charade.
In comparison, Ners has been banned multiple times as well, but he's never claimed repeatedly to be someone else like Chico's has. "Something truly wrong" barely scratches the surface.
-
"Respectfully, I believe you're wrong here. Most people who protest police shootings and the like are not "protesting the whole profession" any more than those taking a knee during the anthem are protesting a flag. They're protesting the misconduct committed members of that profession and the historical lack of consequence to those guilty of said misconduct.
This is an unfortunate rhetorical trick played by those who don't like the protests. Shift the narrative from "they're protesting police misconduct" to "they're protesting ALL COPS." Shift the narrative from "NFL players are protesting racial injustice" to "NFL players are protesting the flag."
And yeah, I'm sure you can find an example of someone protesting ALL COPS. Those people are the exception."
please explain the mass protests of cops-...fry'em like bacon and kill all cops and most horrendously, the random shootings of cops while sitting in their car or the ambushes, etc...in these instances, they are not singling out certain cops or groups of police. these are acts of despicable acts of violence that should warrant the death penalty. i will not even put them in the category of protests
-
This all depends on what profession is getting painted with a broad brush. Few want to throw all teachers under the bus because 1 of 10000 of them will have a sexual relationship with a minor student .. so yeah, you're correct, no one needs to rush out and say "99% of teachers aren't pedophiles." -- But when an incident goes sideways for a cop, indeed, their whole profession is eagerly protested by chunks of the population.
Mix law enforcement, bad actors, constant physical and verbal evasion, the need for snap decisions, not to mention a gun culture together, and no one should be under the delusion that 100% of all interactions will have perfect outcomes. Train and strive for it, yes. Realize it's a toxic stew with an error rate that indeed creates a need to defend those who enforce the law when the inevitable occurs.
So, yes, I do give extra credit for good policing interactions, especially in this age as disrespect for law enforcement trends upwards.
The problem with comparing cops with teachers, say, or other professions is the unique nature of their job. It comes with considerably more risk than other jobs, and this fact deservedly gives them an umbrella of lenience. Legally speaking, there's a whole body of case law around how law enforcement gets a degree of latitude under the Constitution to adequately discharge of their duties. And that's absolutely how it should be.
But that umbrella of leniency is not endless. Indeed, cops are also entrusted with a profound level of power and, therefore, are given a unique level of responsibility. The reason why the brush is sometimes swept more broadly across the canvas for cops is because there's a long, proven history of targeted abuse of that power and responsibility. This is where the original topic of this thread really comes into play - for us white folks, police abuse really is a rare occurrence, such that from our perspective, painting with a broad brush is not justified. But to a black person who spent the 60's,70's, 80's, and 90's in south LA, they've seen something completely different and a broad brush is not a distortion, it's their reality. Truly a world apart. The protests should be - and largely are - about awareness of this fact, to correct for the likelihood that so many of us have been insulated from experiences that minorities, by contrast, are forced to live with daily.
-
Well said, bbj.
Also good to note the vast universe of difference between rural policing and urban policing.
-
Intersectionality is cultural cancer. Marxism repackaged and placed in the vehicle of "racial justice." It should be resisted at every turn.
-
Intersectionality is cultural cancer. Marxism repackaged and placed in the vehicle of "racial justice." It should be resisted at every turn.
It's a theory that makes some good observations and many zany ones. Just like Marxism.
-
I’m impressed this isn’t locked yet.
-
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/video-shows-milwaukee-police-trying-protect-sterling-brown-arrest-170653832.html
Cops realize what they have done.
-
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/video-shows-milwaukee-police-trying-protect-sterling-brown-arrest-170653832.html
Cops realize what they have done.
Every one of them should be fired.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSKRLZSzCXA
-
Every one of them should be fired.
Yep, every last one of them.
You wonder that if it wasn't a Bucks player if they would have gotten away scot-free, too.
-
Yep, every last one of them.
You wonder that if it wasn't a Bucks player if they would have gotten away scot-free, too.
Well, they admit as much in the video, right? Would anyone have even asked for the video if this wasn't a person of means and status?
-
Well, they admit as much in the video, right? Would anyone have even asked for the video if this wasn't a person of means and status?
Correct.
Also what I find fascinating is that the additional body camera footage was leaked unlike the original footage which the police department released themselves. The police department said that the additional footage wouldn't be formally released until all statue requirements were met.
A) Who leaked it, because ya gotta think it's someone in the department that thinks this is shady as $hit
B) Why is the more damning video "classified" for longer than the original video
C) This is a really really bad start for the new police chief. Not only, IMO, has he underpenalized the offices...the PR has been a disaster and the lack of forthcomingness(is that a word?) is appalling. I want to give the guy the benefit of the doubt but this is really really troublesome to me.
D) I'm not sure how anyone can watch all of the videos in their entirety and still go...."well ya know, it takes two to tango".
E) It takes an famous person to expose this, what does it look like for the common citizen who has this happen to them? The majority of cops are fine upstanding officers, but this stuff is happening way too much and needs to be seriously addressed in each community.
-
Correct.
Also what I find fascinating is that the additional body camera footage was leaked unlike the original footage which the police department released themselves. The police department said that the additional footage wouldn't be formally released until all statue requirements were met.
A) Who leaked it, because ya gotta think it's someone in the department that thinks this is shady as $hit
B) Why is the more damning video "classified" for longer than the original video
C) This is a really really bad start for the new police chief. Not only, IMO, has he underpenalized the offices...the PR has been a disaster and the lack of forthcomingness(is that a word?) is appalling. I want to give the guy the benefit of the doubt but this is really really troublesome to me.
D) I'm not sure how anyone can watch all of the videos in their entirety and still go...."well ya know, it takes two to tango".
E) It takes an famous person to expose this, what does it look like for the common citizen who has this happen to them? The majority of cops are fine upstanding officers, but this stuff is happening way too much and needs to be seriously addressed in each community.
Great points as usual, mu03.
See, this is how the narrative gets made that "the cops are racist." It's so unfair to the vast, vast, VAST majority of clean, honorable cops. But this kind of action, which goes all the way up to the top, is ugly and puts a stain on good ones like our own nyg.
-
Great points as usual, mu03.
See, this is how the narrative gets made that "the cops are racist." It's so unfair to the vast, vast, VAST majority of clean, honorable cops. But this kind of action, which goes all the way up to the top, is ugly and puts a stain on good ones like our own nyg.
Completely agree, and while I don't know the job I'd think some of the change has to be driven from within. What do the officers that weren't there in the MPD think of this?
-
Great points as usual, mu03.
See, this is how the narrative gets made that "the cops are racist." It's so unfair to the vast, vast, VAST majority of clean, honorable cops. But this kind of action, which goes all the way up to the top, is ugly and puts a stain on good ones like our own nyg.
I do think it is unfair to the vast majority of clean/honorable cops. But when those clean honorable cops know a rogue peer is doing things that are underhanded, dirty, racist or similar and they turn a blind eye, they are also culpable.
I work in science. If peers were fabricating data, and I allowed it to occur without speaking up, my profession would rightfully be vilified, and even though I don't fabricate data, the fact I let it go on, without speaking up makes me part of the problem.
For the record, I've reported peers for data fabrication, or "selective" data presentation before.
If something unacceptable is occurring, we all need to speak up or it's roots will take hold.
-
https://deadspin.com/lawsuit-milwaukee-officer-at-sterling-brown-arrest-jok-1826956001
Wow.
-
https://deadspin.com/lawsuit-milwaukee-officer-at-sterling-brown-arrest-jok-1826956001
Wow.
A good reminder that there are some people who are profoundly and irredeemably stupid. The fact this guy was given a badge and any kind of authority is a serious failure of the police department.
-
https://deadspin.com/lawsuit-milwaukee-officer-at-sterling-brown-arrest-jok-1826956001
Wow.
I can only assume that this officer has no idea how much he harmed his case
-
Social media sure does help morons let their freak flags fly. Be it facebook, twitter, etc.
-
Social media sure does help morons let their freak flags fly. Be it facebook, twitter, Scoop, etc.
FIFY
-
White privilege means that you don't get abused by the cops for illegal parking, and then have them double down by making absolutely asinine facebook posts about it. All while the cops racism, incompetence and stupidity is defended.
-
I am appalled that you people talk about a police officer this way.
-
And they say you don't have a sense of humor. And in this case, they label themselves. I know too many cops to ever paint them all with the same brush. The actions of these particular cops are indefensible.
The only remaining questions are will anything be learned and how many 0'$ in the settlement.
-
Social media sure does help morons let their freak flags fly. Be it facebook, twitter, etc.
It is brutal. The sad thing is that the poor folks of MKE end up footing this perfectly legitimate bill that will be paid. Unfortunately, too much remains the same from the days of Harold Breier.
"Serve and protect." Yeah, right.
-
Did these knuckleheads post using a city server or city paid for smart phones? Jeeezz.
-
How he interacted with the police is the essence of whether the use of a taser is justified. Therefore, the audio is clearly an important part of the video.
You got that crap right.
-
Is it of interest to you that Brown, supposedly, was parked in a manner that took up 2 handicapped parking spots without a permit? Audio and video will tell the entire story. Are you kidding? Its all relevant.
Soz afta erthing dats cum up. wats yur toughts?
-
Ewe axed, sew----the police mishandled the situation, overreacted, and escalated an investigation for which there is little defense and fell outside the borders of their police training.
However, the entire episode never happens if Brown legally parks at Walgreens. Also, when the police tell you to take your hands out of your pockets at 2:30 am, you just do it immediately.
-
Ewe axed, sew----the police mishandled the situation, overreacted, and escalated an investigation for which there is little defense and fell outside the borders of their police training.
However, the entire episode never happens if Brown legally parks at Walgreens. Also, when the police tell you to take your hands out of your pockets at 2:30 am, you just do it immediately.
Lol. Okay, dude
-
What part of that is laughable?
-
What part of that is laughable?
Everything before "However," is accurate.
Everything after "However," is victim blaming and, therefore, laughable as it gives the police an excuse for their actions.
-
Just the facts.
-
Give credit to brain surgeon and 4ever.
They are very consistent in never letting decency interfere with their racism.
-
Ewe axed, sew----the police mishandled the situation, overreacted, and escalated an investigation for which there is little defense and fell outside the borders of their police training.
However, the entire episode never happens if Brown legally parks at Walgreens. Also, when the police tell you to take your hands out of your pockets at 2:30 am, you just do it immediately.
Victim blaming at its finest.
-
Just the facts.
“She was dressed like she wanted it,” is probably a “fact” in your eyes too.
-
Ewe axed, sew----the police mishandled the situation, overreacted, and escalated an investigation for which there is little defense and fell outside the borders of their police training.
However, the entire episode never happens if Brown legally parks at Walgreens. Also, when the police tell you to take your hands out of your pockets at 2:30 am, you just do it immediately.
Guessin weez jus splittin wit dah handz'n duh poketz ainn'a?
-
4ever, I understand your entire statement. And if he had not parked in the handicapped spot, this is a different story. But the crime was committed against him. You are blaming the victim.
-
Every one of them should be fired.
I would like to revise my statement.
Everyone of them should be fired.
Several of them should be charged with assault. There needs to be harsh penalties for bad actors. They assaulted him, they should be charged and imprisoned and treated like any other criminal.
-
Nowhere in my entire statement was race mentioned or implied. In fact my intention, for the words after "However," is that they pertain to all citizens. To argue otherwise implies one disregards law and order in our society.
-
Nowhere in my entire statement was race mentioned or implied. In fact my intention, for the words after "However," is that they pertain to all citizens. To argue otherwise implies one disregards law and order in our society.
Most people disregard law & order in our society, especially in cases where it applies to them for some matter they feel is trivial. There are many examples.
-
Ewe axed, sew----the police mishandled the situation, overreacted, and escalated an investigation for which there is little defense and fell outside the borders of their police training.
However, the entire episode never happens if Brown legally parks at Walgreens. Also, when the police tell you to take your hands out of your pockets at 2:30 am, you just do it immediately.
IIRC 3 seconds elapsed from the demand to remove his hands until he was flat on his face for the next 15 minutes. He claims a cop bumped his car setting off the alarm and he was reaching for the key fob.
-
Most people disregard law & order in our society, especially in cases where it applies to them for some matter they feel is trivial. There are many examples.
Like parking in handicapped spots. Yeah, its wrong. Able-bodied people shouldn't do it. But I know of two individuals (both white) who did it thinking they wouldn't get caught, got caught, paid their ticket, and learned their lesson. Neither of them was accosted and assaulted by a group of police officers. Neither was tased or arrested.
Will Sterling Brown ever double-park in a handicapped spot again? Probably not. Did he need to get tased to learn his lesson? I highly doubt it.
-
Nowhere in my entire statement was race mentioned or implied. In fact my intention, for the words after "However," is that they pertain to all citizens. To argue otherwise implies one disregards law and order in our society.
On the list of people who "disregards law and order in our society" that night, Sterling Brown was at the very bottom.
I'm glad your comfortable with the concept of living in a police state.
-
Nowhere in my entire statement was race mentioned or implied. In fact my intention, for the words after "However," is that they pertain to all citizens. To argue otherwise implies one disregards law and order in our society.
Have you ever gone 10 MPH over the speed limit or not come to a complete and full stop at a traffic light and/or stop sign before proceeding? If you just don't do those things you can avoid being piled on by police and tazed. Those are the equivalents of parking illegally, does it make sense that those things can also escalate to me or you or Sterling Brown being tazed?
Maybe this isn't you, but I love the folks that scream "the government needs to leave X thing/right alone" while simultaneously saying "just follow exactly what the government has told you to do and you won't get beaten/tazed/murdered".
More than anything I'd just love people to be consistent in their philosophy, makes things much easier to understand if you don't have to untangle Gordian knots of mental justifications for hypocritical positions.
-
Most people disregard law & order in our society, especially in cases where it applies to them for some matter they feel is trivial. There are many examples.
Right. And 4ever thinks that unless someone immediately does everything that the Police ask you when you commit trivial acts, they should be tased and thrown to the ground. Otherwise we are living in a society with complete disorder. Comical..
-
Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.
-
If they do, they should be ticketed. Not tased.
-
Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.
LOL. No one said that Brown shouldn't have received a citation for parking in a handicapped spot.
Man who would have thought the nonsensical crap you normally say here would be the most intelligent stuff you post?
-
Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.
I agree most of those offenses all can have big negatives consequences but aren't you sortve making a false equivalency? Nobody was going to die from Browns poor parking choice... if someone can find an instance where an individual died from the extra walk I'll eat my words
-
Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.
I understand your point that laws matter. But the issue here is that the Constitution matters more, and the Constitution (which, generally speaking, outlines the limitations of what the government can do against the people) forbids the use of force in such petty, non-violent circumstances. I know you said you agree the police acted inappropriately. And really, the analysis should end there. If the police broadly used violence in situations like it was used against Brown — in the name of law and order or otherwise — would mark a dark moment for America, and would mean our rights under the Constitution, subject to whims of the government, are meaningless.
-
Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?
-
Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?
Well the entire incident could have been avoided had the Police decided to ignore an illegally parked car at a Walgreens at 2:00 AM.
But that's not the point. The point is that Brown illegally parked, the Police investigated, and the Police escalated the situation unnecessarily. Brown didn't.
Brown should have been cited. That's it.
-
To my knowledge no one has agrued otherwise.
-
Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?
Duh, it's Walgreen's fault. If Walgreen's wasn't in business, Brown couldn't have illegal parked there in the first place. Simple, aina?
-
To my knowledge no one has agrued otherwise.
Well then you shouldn't be blaming Brown for what occurred afterwards.
-
Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.
False equivalency. The worst case of Sterling Brown's actions were to significantly inconvenience a disabled person who needs to get into Walgreens and park in the handicap spot. Intentionally driving through a light could cause thousands of dollars of damage and/or series injury/death.
Nearly everyone, every day "breaks the law" to the same degree as Sterling Brown did...if the consequence of that action is the potential to be tazed this is the very definition of a police state and a state of being I refuse to accept in this country.
-
Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?
You imply that the answer to the bolded is no, without any basis for it. Everyday black people are stopped for "looking suspicious".
He very likely would have been questioned as to what he was doing in the Walgreens parking lot at 2 AM, if parked legally...we will never no, so your assumption that by parking legally he could have avoided it, is assumption not fact.
Given the treatment of him by the cops, it may be a bad assumption.
And their assault of Brown is also a crime, but you don't seem to be advocating for them to be arrested.
-
You imply that the answer to the bolded is no, without any basis for it. Everyday black people are stopped for "looking suspicious".
He very likely would have been questioned as to what he was doing in the Walgreens parking lot at 2 AM, if parked legally...we will never no, so your assumption that by parking legally he could have avoided it, is assumption not fact.
Given the treatment of him by the cops, it may be a bad assumption.
And their assault of Brown is also a crime, but you don't seem to be advocating for them to be arrested.
Honestly it's not relevant. I get your point but arguing what ifs is kind of masturbatorial rhetorically when the what actually happened was so bad and is inarguable as acceptable. You're route is just gonna get a "you don't know that" and achieves nothing.
-
Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?
To my knowledge, no one has argued otherwise.
But once the "entire fiasco" wasn't avoided, the cops needlessly escalated the situation, making it 100% on them.
They broke the law numerous times, they assaulted one of the citizens they had sworn to protect, they tried to cover it up, they mocked the "rule of law" by cracking jokes as they committed illegal acts, several of them publicly exposed the racism that they had kept more private, and hopefully every one of them gets the jail time he deserves.
4ever, despite your schtick I always thought you were an ethical guy. But with the way you have blamed the victim here ... eye gess knott.
-
Maybe this isn't you, but I love the folks that scream "the government needs to leave X thing/right alone" while simultaneously saying "just follow exactly what the government has told you to do and you won't get beaten/tazed/murdered".
Similar to these brainiacs.
(https://b-i.forbesimg.com/peterjreilly/files/2013/06/govoutofmedicare6.jpg)
-
Similar to these brainiacs.
(https://b-i.forbesimg.com/peterjreilly/files/2013/06/govoutofmedicare6.jpg)
Unfortunately I think the majority of our populace is now these types of brainiacs.
-
Honestly it's not relevant. I get your point but arguing what ifs is kind of masturbatorial rhetorically when the what actually happened was so bad and is inarguable as acceptable. You're route is just gonna get a "you don't know that" and achieves nothing.
True. Good point.
-
Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment.
Huh? Excessive force is unlawful ya bobo.
-
Unfortunately I think the majority of our populace is now these types of brainiacs.
Just because they yell the loudest does not make them a majority.
-
Just because they yell the loudest does not make them a majority.
#truth
-
Right. And 4ever thinks that unless someone immediately does everything that the Police ask you when you commit trivial acts, they should be tased and thrown to the ground. Otherwise we are living in a society with complete disorder. Comical..
everything seems so simple in your life...especially looking backwards-nice ?-(.
first let me preface this, looking backwards-what the police did to brown was way out of bounds, unacceptable, broke the law and should be used on how NOT to finish off an interrogation.
now, what 4ever and i are trying to convey however is that police do have a protocol to go through- a paradigm to follow. the whole scope of the situation must be kept in perspective here. 2:00am, the area of town which has been noted to have a higher than average rate of prostitution among other crimes. mr brown was with an unknown female at the time as well. ok, double parking in the handicap section set everything in motion, then browns behavior. this is where the paradigm kicks in-what if brown pulls his hands out of his pockets, has a gun and shoots a police officer(s)? one could say that brown, by not immediately heeding the officers commands was being either intentionally provocative, altered state of mind, activist or just plain dumb. police have a sequence of scenarios they must go thru and so far mr brown was not helping out anyone's cause. was the female being held against her will, 2 involved in any of the probable number of issues that i am sure these cops were on surveillance of as well. were they getting ready to rob the walgreens...so many things could have been in play here. the police need information before than can just walk away or let mr brown go just as they did with michael bennett in las vegas if any of you shall recall. i believe this whole incident could have been defused very early
that all being said, the police over-reacted. yes i know, the under statement of the year. but remember, this is looking back. i'm sure many other police watching this now can see where they went wrong. but our point is, if not for a group of rogue cops, there are so many other directions this scene could have taken. i have seen scenes where the police will briefly handcuff a subject until they can deem the situation safe-they never got to that point with mr brown. there were just too many variables going on here for them to just what? walk away? once they engaged mr brown, the situation had to be assessed.
that is where the cops went wrong-having 8 cops, there should not have been the need to exercise the amount of force they exhibited. these guys either missed this part of clearing an area to be safe,questioning and detaining a suspect or were just bad people. i am sure their training shows alternatives to this behavior-a little more diplomacy perhaps. it is of utmost importance that these police be vetted properly before sending them out into the real world. either these guys weren't ready for this situation or they became cops for the wrong reasons, but whoever cleared them to take on their present duties should be demoted or fired as well.
bottom line, there were too many moving parts here to come to a knee jerk reaction. it was a bad beginning and it was a very bad ending. let's just be thankful that no one was killed and this incident may help show other cops of what NOT to do during the course of their assessments
-
everything seems so simple in your life...especially looking backwards-nice ?-(.
first let me preface this, looking backwards-what the police did to brown was way out of bounds, unacceptable, broke the law and should be used on how NOT to finish off an interrogation.
now, what 4ever and i are trying to convey however is that police do have a protocol to go through- a paradigm to follow. the whole scope of the situation must be kept in perspective here. 2:00am, the area of town which has been noted to have a higher than average rate of prostitution among other crimes. mr brown was with an unknown female at the time as well. ok, double parking in the handicap section set everything in motion, then browns behavior. this is where the paradigm kicks in-what if brown pulls his hands out of his pockets, has a gun and shoots a police officer(s)? one could say that brown, by not immediately heeding the officers commands was being either intentionally provocative, altered state of mind, activist or just plain dumb. police have a sequence of scenarios they must go thru and so far mr brown was not helping out anyone's cause. was the female being held against her will, 2 involved in any of the probable number of issues that i am sure these cops were on surveillance of as well. were they getting ready to rob the walgreens...so many things could have been in play here. the police need information before than can just walk away or let mr brown go just as they did with michael bennett in las vegas if any of you shall recall. i believe this whole incident could have been defused very early
that all being said, the police over-reacted. yes i know, the under statement of the year. but remember, this is looking back. i'm sure many other police watching this now can see where they went wrong. but our point is, if not for a group of rogue cops, there are so many other directions this scene could have taken. i have seen scenes where the police will briefly handcuff a subject until they can deem the situation safe-they never got to that point with mr brown. there were just too many variables going on here for them to just what? walk away? once they engaged mr brown, the situation had to be assessed.
that is where the cops went wrong-having 8 cops, there should not have been the need to exercise the amount of force they exhibited. these guys either missed this part of clearing an area to be safe,questioning and detaining a suspect or were just bad people. i am sure their training shows alternatives to this behavior-a little more diplomacy perhaps. it is of utmost importance that these police be vetted properly before sending them out into the real world. either these guys weren't ready for this situation or they became cops for the wrong reasons, but whoever cleared them to take on their present duties should be demoted or fired as well.
bottom line, there were too many moving parts here to come to a knee jerk reaction. it was a bad beginning and it was a very bad ending. let's just be thankful that no one was killed and this incident may help show other cops of what NOT to do during the course of their assessments
I think that's where you essentially explained white priveledge. The immediate suspicion of prostitution etc are all things that just don't happen with white folks
-
I think that's where you essentially explained white priveledge. The immediate suspicion of prostitution etc are all things that just don't happen with white folks
Exactly. Thank you. Rocket wants to explain away the fact that these cops, one of which was overtly racist on social media, very likely treated Brown different than they would have a white guy because of his skin color.
-
I think that's where you essentially explained white priveledge. The immediate suspicion of prostitution etc are all things that just don't happen with white folks
Actually, you didn't even have to read that far. Note his prefatory comment:
first let me preface this, looking backwards-what the police did to brown was way out of bounds, unacceptable, broke the law and should be used on how NOT to finish off an interrogation.
Interrogation? For parking illegally?
-
There's a group here who have been posting under the wrong thread. What they are looking for is the thread entitled, "White Guilt."
-
There's a group here who have been posting under the wrong thread. What they are looking for is the thread entitled, "White Guilt."
Really, 4ever? That's where you're going with this? Interesting.
Honestly, my friend, is it your contention that a white guy who did the exact same thing as Brown would have been handled the exact same way by those cops?
-
There's a group here who have been posting under the wrong thread. What they are looking for is the thread entitled, "White Guilt."
Bull$hit. Acknowledging there is systemic, institutional advantage baked in for white dudes is not guilt, it's a recognition that those of us who benefit from it need to be part of the effort to kill it. I don't have any guilt over the system, I didn't create it, but I sure as hell can do something about it so that the system doesn't continue in it's present form.
-
Bull$hit. Acknowledging there is systemic, institutional advantage baked in for white dudes is not guilt, it's a recognition that those of us who benefit from it need to be part of the effort to kill it. I don't have any guilt over the system, I didn't create it, but I sure as hell can do something about it so that the system doesn't continue in it's present form.
Well said, mu03!!
-
There's a group here who have been posting under the wrong thread. What they are looking for is the thread entitled, "White Guilt."
I am shocked that an old, white dentist who lives in the 'Quon feels that way.
-
Bull$hit. Acknowledging there is systemic, institutional advantage baked in for white dudes is not guilt, it's a recognition that those of us who benefit from it need to be part of the effort to kill it. I don't have any guilt over the system, I didn't create it, but I sure as hell can do something about it so that the system doesn't continue in it's present form.
Visual representation of rocket and 4ever:
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/05_04/035ostrich_468x538.jpg)
-
Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?
So, the next time you go even 1 mph over the speed limit you will gladly allow a cop to beat and electrocute you - as well as threaten the lives of you friends?
You and surgeon will twist yourself into a pretzel to rationalize that the black guys deserve this treatment - but that you are a good law abiding white guy.
Others here are much more diplomatic than I. But why beat around the bush?
I can't even believe I waste a second of my time arguing with racists. You guys have been emboldened and are crawling out of the woodwork everywhere.
-
Visual representation of rocket and 4ever:
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/05_04/035ostrich_468x538.jpg)
It's true, but that's part of what we need to do is help them pick their heads up and see what's going on (which is why I'm way less confrontational than Jockey, sorry my man :) ) We need Rocket and 4ever as allies if the system is going to change.
This is not an attack on you guys as creators of the system or racists yourselves(I truly believe you aren't), but I'm hoping through this conversation you can see that there is a fundamental truth that if you aren't a white dude, you could be treated differently by cops(as in this particular instance) and in cases where that is clear (not sure how it's not clear here) we need to call it out, hold them accountable, and expect consequences. It is the only way things change, and I guarantee you it will be a change for the better of all, including yourselves. We(the people of this country) are the ones in charge, let's take ownership of that and shape a society that doesn't put an thumb on the scale for some but not others.
-
It's true, but that's part of what we need to do is help them pick their heads up and see what's going on (which is why I'm way less confrontational than Jockey, sorry my man :) ) We need Rocket and 4ever as allies if the system is going to change.
It's a noble effort, and the right thing to do, I just think it is nearly impossible for find common ground when you have Fox News, OAN, Brietbart, and 1,200 hate radio AM stations continuously telling them that wealthy white male Christians are under attack and are the real victims in the U.S.
-
It's a noble effort, and the right thing to do, I just think it is nearly impossible for find common ground when you have Fox News, OAN, Brietbart, and 1,200 hate radio AM stations continuously telling them that wealthy white male Christians are under attack and are the real victims in the U.S.
1. I am 100 percent of the opinion that the Milwaukee PD are in general quite aggressive and for the most part jerks.
2. Unfortunately the majority of people in my community behave poorly and feed into that police aggression unnecessarily.
3. The social media the cop in this case put out is a reflection of the intersection between 1 and 2. Totally unacceptable but knowing the parties like I do fully understandable.
4. I get pulled over for driving black, have to endure all the other insufferable indignities day after day, month after month and year after year. It has gotten to be a routine in my life that I just take as part of the deal . It sucks but that is what society is all about . At least people call you sir a lot
5. This famous movie quote from Guess Who's Coming To Dinner rather succinctly summarizes my worldview:
You listen to me. You say you don't want to tell me how to live my life. So what do you think you've been doing? You tell me what rights I've got or haven't got, and what I owe to you for what you've done for me. Let me tell you something. I owe you nothing! If you carried that bag a million miles, you did what you're supposed to do! Because you brought me into this world. And from that day you owed me everything you could ever do for me like I will owe my son if I ever have another. But you don't own me! You can't tell me when or where I'm out of line, or try to get me to live my life according to your rules. You don't even know what I am, Dad, you don't know who I am. You don't know how I feel, what I think. And if I tried to explain it the rest of your life you will never understand. You are 30 years older than I am. You and your whole lousy generation believes the way it was for you is the way it's got to be. And not until your whole generation has lain down and died will the dead weight of you be off our backs! You understand, you've got to get off my back! Dad... Dad, you're my father. I'm your son. I love you. I always have and I always will. But you think of yourself as a colored man. I think of myself as a man. Now, I've got a decision to make, hm? And I've got to make it alone, and I gotta make it in a hurry. So would you go out there and see after my mother?
-
It's a noble effort, and the right thing to do, I just think it is nearly impossible for find common ground when you have Fox News, OAN, Brietbart, and 1,200 hate radio AM stations continuously telling them that wealthy white male Christians are under attack and are the real victims in the U.S.
Call me optimistic, but I think all of that is a symptom of the old mindsets dying. Hearts and minds are changing, we just can't see it in all of the noise that technology allows to surface.
-
1. I am 100 percent of the opinion that the Milwaukee PD are in general quite aggressive and for the most part jerks.
2. Unfortunately the majority of people in my community behave poorly and feed into that police aggression unnecessarily.
3. The social media the cop in this case put out is a reflection of the intersection between 1 and 2. Totally unacceptable but knowing the parties like I do fully understandable.
4. I get pulled over for driving black, have to endure all the other insufferable indignities day after day, month after month and year after year. It has gotten to be a routine in my life that I just take as part of the deal . It sucks but that is what society is all about . At least people call you sir a lot
5. This famous movie quote from Guess Who's Coming To Dinner rather succinctly summarizes my worldview:
You listen to me. You say you don't want to tell me how to live my life. So what do you think you've been doing? You tell me what rights I've got or haven't got, and what I owe to you for what you've done for me. Let me tell you something. I owe you nothing! If you carried that bag a million miles, you did what you're supposed to do! Because you brought me into this world. And from that day you owed me everything you could ever do for me like I will owe my son if I ever have another. But you don't own me! You can't tell me when or where I'm out of line, or try to get me to live my life according to your rules. You don't even know what I am, Dad, you don't know who I am. You don't know how I feel, what I think. And if I tried to explain it the rest of your life you will never understand. You are 30 years older than I am. You and your whole lousy generation believes the way it was for you is the way it's got to be. And not until your whole generation has lain down and died will the dead weight of you be off our backs! You understand, you've got to get off my back! Dad... Dad, you're my father. I'm your son. I love you. I always have and I always will. But you think of yourself as a colored man. I think of myself as a man. Now, I've got a decision to make, hm? And I've got to make it alone, and I gotta make it in a hurry. So would you go out there and see after my mother?
You either get something entirely different from that quote than I do or it has not aged as well with you as you might think.
-
It's true, but that's part of what we need to do is help them pick their heads up and see what's going on (which is why I'm way less confrontational than Jockey, sorry my man :) ) We need Rocket and 4ever as allies if the system is going to change.
My wife certainly agrees with you. She's on me all the time about reining it in.
In theory, I agree totally. In day to day, I have a hard time with it.
-
I think that's where you essentially explained white priveledge. The immediate suspicion of prostitution etc are all things that just don't happen with white folks
this is far as i got reading the comments after mine-
you may be right bags, but this is the reality of policing in the area they were in. if any cop goes into any area, not knowing the history of the region, unfortunately, they will not be for long in this line of work
-
this is far as i got reading the comments after mine-
you may be right bags, but this is the reality of policing in the area they were in. if any cop goes into any area, not knowing the history of the region, unfortunately, they will not be for long in this line of work
Congrats. You just endorsed racial profiling.
-
Exactly. Thank you. Rocket wants to explain away the fact that these cops, one of which was overtly racist on social media, very likely treated Brown different than they would have a white guy because of his skin color.
never said that, did i? please do not read any more into what i said, than what i said
-
Actually, you didn't even have to read that far. Note his prefatory comment:
Interrogation? For parking illegally?
this COULD have been A LOT more complicated than parking illegally. do you have any idea of what needs to go through cops minds as they approach situations?
once again however-must we establish or preface every comment we make, just to be clear, that these cops acted badly if not criminally
-
Bull$hit. Acknowledging there is systemic, institutional advantage baked in for white dudes is not guilt, it's a recognition that those of us who benefit from it need to be part of the effort to kill it. I don't have any guilt over the system, I didn't create it, but I sure as hell can do something about it so that the system doesn't continue in it's present form.
Have any of you ever been to poor white parts of this country? If you have, you will see the police profile them, too. I'm in agreement with you that minorities are overly profiled, but it is not alone based on race, but all too often on who commits crime, which is typically the poor as a result of need.
-
Congrats. You just endorsed racial profiling.
once again sully, race has not been mentioned-but, nice try mr provocateur. unless you have something more civil to add, which is rare, it would be best you run along, eyn'er?
i'd rather engage more level headed, non-condescending, name calling posters like mu03 and the like. those are the people who can further a productive conversation sans the personal crap
-
Have any of you ever been to poor white parts of this country? If you have, you will see the police profile them, too. I'm in agreement with you that minorities are overly profiled, but it is not alone based on race, but all too often on who commits crime, which is typically the poor as a result of need.
wow! thank you!!
-
once again sully, race has not been mentioned-but, nice try mr provocateur. unless you have something more civil to add, which is rare, it would be best you run along, eyn'er?
Sorry but Bags specifically brought up race in the post you responded to.
And I aint running along sunshine.
i'd rather engage more level headed, non-condescending, name calling posters like mu03 and the like. those are the people who can further a productive conversation sans the personal crap
Good for you. If you don't want me involved, send them a personal message.
-
Have any of you ever been to poor white parts of this country? If you have, you will see the police profile them, too. I'm in agreement with you that minorities are overly profiled, but it is not alone based on race, but all too often on who commits crime, which is typically the poor as a result of need.
Is Sterling Brown poor? What would lead the Police to believe that he is poor?
-
"Good for you. If you don't want me involved, send them a personal message"
try exercising a little restraint once, maybe even being nice-you'll feel so much better... if that's possible
-
"Good for you. If you don't want me involved, send them a personal message"
try exercising a little restraint once, maybe even being nice-you'll feel so much better... if that's possible
I feel great and have no need to change my approach.
-
once again sully, race has not been mentioned-but, nice try mr provocateur. unless you have something more civil to add, which is rare, it would be best you run along, eyn'er?
i'd rather engage more level headed, non-condescending, name calling posters like mu03 and the like. those are the people who can further a productive conversation sans the personal crap
I think race has been mentioned here, in this thread, multiple times.
But I also think, that even if you're saying you personally haven't mentioned race, you should acknowledge it. Because, obviously - by looking at what the cops have said during/after the incident - it played a role here.
-
never said that, did i? please do not read any more into what i said, than what i said
Classic racial profiling.
Have any of you ever been to poor white parts of this country? If you have, you will see the police profile them, too.
Absolutely ridiculous.
-
Have any of you ever been to poor white parts of this country? If you have, you will see the police profile them, too. I'm in agreement with you that minorities are overly profiled, but it is not alone based on race, but all too often on who commits crime, which is typically the poor as a result of need.
I have(lived in 'em too) and they don't, not nearly the same way. Do you deny that in a police situation that race has an impact on how that situation ends?
-
Absolutely ridiculous.
I'm not saying it is equivalent. There is no comparison, but it does happen. Police tend to profile based on poverty because that is linked to crime. Minorities tend to be poorer. It can also happen in certain neighborhoods that are prominent with one race or another. Definitely not the same level or degree. An example
https://patch.com/new-york/easthampton/racial-profiling-it-happens-white-people-too
-
I have(lived in 'em too) and they don't, not nearly the same way. Do you deny that in a police situation that race has an impact on how that situation ends?
Not sure if you are a Washington Post fan, but here is an article that touches on it in the last section.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/12/04/police-union-on-brown-and-garner-we-dont-believe-its-an-issue-of-race-we-believe-its-an-issue-of-poverty/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6363432194b0
In full transparency, someone in my family is a member of law enforcement and she echoes this belief, that ultimately it is poverty based. As a result, that means profiling will happen to all races, but more to minorities. That does not exclude whites, and in poor areas where poor whites make up a significant portion of society, they are profiled if you wish to use that term. She does not like that term, by the way.
-
Is Sterling Brown poor? What would lead the Police to believe that he is poor?
You seem to be confusing me with someone else. What happened to Brown should not have happened at all. It happens far too often to minorities. That doesn't mean it never happens to other races, because it does, but to a lesser degree. Poverty is the key.
-
I guess cops can't tell if the black guys are rich or poor. They all look alike. :-\
-
I'm not saying it is equivalent. There is no comparison, but it does happen. Definitely not the same level or degree.
In full transparency, someone in my family is a member of law enforcement and she echoes this belief, that ultimately it is poverty based.
If it is "definitely not the same level or degree," and if "there is no comparison," then it is not "ultimately" poverty based.
I have seen no evidence to convince me that it is anything but "ultimately" race based. Sometimes (but not very often) it happens to poor white people too.
-
If it is "definitely not the same level or degree," and if "there is no comparison," then it is not "ultimately" poverty based.
I have seen no evidence to convince me that it is anything but "ultimately" race based. Sometimes (but not very often) it happens to poor white people too.
At least you came around to admitting it happens to all races. It is poverty based, if most of the poor are minorities, then they will be profiled more. The question is whether it is racial or based on poverty? With what I hear from law enforcement, how they are trained, the strategies used, even the science behind it, poverty is the driver. Poverty is where crime occurs, and law enforcement is deployed where crime occurs.
-
At least you came around to admitting it happens to all races. It is poverty based, if most of the poor are minorities, then they will be profiled more. The question is whether it is racial or based on poverty? With what I hear from law enforcement, how they are trained, the strategies used, even the science behind it, poverty is the driver. Poverty is where crime occurs, and law enforcement is deployed where crime occurs.
You are allowed to think whatever you want, including that I "came around" to something.
Yes, I admit that it has happened to some white people, both poor and rich. I admit that it has happened to Christians and Jews and people with one leg and fat people and skinny people.
It's like arguing about discrimination itself. Yes, every race, religion, creed and color has been discriminated against at some point.
But discrimination - like this cop stuff - happens mostly to black men.
Trying to muddy the debate by pulling out examples of others it has happened to ... that's a favorite trick of the aggrieved white, Christian, middle-class males that Ben Folds sings about.
-
"But discrimination - like this cop stuff - happens mostly to black men."
so if the violence against "black men" occurs via a black police officer, or hispanic or any other minority police, is it discrimination?
-
"But discrimination - like this cop stuff - happens mostly to black men."
so if the violence against "black men" occurs via a black police officer, or hispanic or any other minority police, is it discrimination?
Yes. Next question
-
"But discrimination - like this cop stuff - happens mostly to black men."
so if the violence against "black men" occurs via a black police officer, or hispanic or any other minority police, is it discrimination?
Of course.
-
You seem to be confusing me with someone else. What happened to Brown should not have happened at all. It happens far too often to minorities. That doesn't mean it never happens to other races, because it does, but to a lesser degree. Poverty is the key.
Brown isn’t impoverished. You are making a bad argument.
-
Yes. Next question
is it racist?
-
is it racist?
Yes. People can be racist against their own race.
-
is it racist?
Black people can be socially conditioned to unreasonably fear black people just as easily as white people can.
-
so if the violence against "black men" occurs via a black police officer, or hispanic or any other minority police, is it discrimination?
is it racist?
I'll offer a different opinion/answer to both questions: impossible to tell without more information.
I think the incident with Brown was unquestionably discriminatory and racist. There are a lot of factors that lead me to that conclusion.
I think anybody that provides a definitive answer to these questions -- either in the affirmative or in the negative -- without more information, is admitting that they don't think the facts matter in these cases. That's a problem. On both sides.
-
I'll offer a different opinion/answer to both questions: impossible to tell without more information.
I think the incident with Brown was unquestionably discriminatory and racist. There are a lot of factors that lead me to that conclusion.
I think anybody that provides a definitive answer to these questions -- either in the affirmative or in the negative -- without more information, is admitting that they don't think the facts matter in these cases. That's a problem. On both sides.
That's reasonable, Still.
But as long as we're all generalizing (not saying you did here at all; in fact, you try to avoid doing so, to your credit.) ... generally, I'd say that yes, it is discrimination. It certainly is racial profiling, which might or might not meet the definition of "racism" for some.
It's almost comical to watch the way some of my fellow Caucasians work so hard to try to find an "out" or a "gotcha" when it comes to racism.
Reverse discrimination, black-on-black crime, rare examples of whitey getting profiled, etc. "Aha! See? The victims aren't just blacks!"
I'm not sure why they can't accept the overwhelming evidence that men of color are discriminated against so much more often than others.
-
That's reasonable, Still.
But as long as we're all generalizing (not saying you did here at all; in fact, you try to avoid doing so, to your credit.) ... generally, I'd say that yes, it is discrimination. It certainly is racial profiling, which might or might not meet the definition of "racism" for some.
It's almost comical to watch the way some of my fellow Caucasians work so hard to try to find an "out" or a "gotcha" when it comes to racism.
Reverse discrimination, black-on-black crime, rare examples of whitey getting profiled, etc. "Aha! See? The victims aren't just blacks!"
I'm not sure why they can't accept the overwhelming evidence that men of color are discriminated against so much more often than others.
I generally agree with the things that you've said here. I think it's unfortunate that some people have such knee-jerk reactions on these questions. They are often very difficult, complex situations.
And, while I would tend to agree with your "general" statement, I know from first hand experience that if I take a position that is contrary to that "general" principal in a specific case, it's pretty likely that I will be called a racist. I find that offensive.
-
I generally agree with the things that you've said here. I think it's unfortunate that some people have such knee-jerk reactions on these questions. They are often very difficult, complex situations.
And, while I would tend to agree with your "general" statement, I know from first hand experience that if I take a position that is contrary to that "general" principal in a specific case, it's pretty likely that I will be called a racist. I find that offensive.
i like all of this. seriously, i'm learning something here. what i find most difficult is, with all good intentions, i find myself wandering into racist waters and don't even realize it. think this way...no, that way...no, that's offensive to this person...whoopsie, too much the other way...
can i have a reasonable fear of- fill in the blank people, if i am walking in certain areas...i'm afraid to stick up for myself or my family here for fear of getting blasted. my suggestion or question if i may, can we be a little more reasonable here and use some common sense without dropping the "R" bomb so quickly?
-
I generally agree with the things that you've said here. I think it's unfortunate that some people have such knee-jerk reactions on these questions. They are often very difficult, complex situations.
And, while I would tend to agree with your "general" statement, I know from first hand experience that if I take a position that is contrary to that "general" principal in a specific case, it's pretty likely that I will be called a racist. I find that offensive.
Wah wahhhhhhh!
-
You are allowed to think whatever you want, including that I "came around" to something.
Yes, I admit that it has happened to some white people, both poor and rich. I admit that it has happened to Christians and Jews and people with one leg and fat people and skinny people.
It's like arguing about discrimination itself. Yes, every race, religion, creed and color has been discriminated against at some point.
But discrimination - like this cop stuff - happens mostly to black men.
Trying to muddy the debate by pulling out examples of others it has happened to ... that's a favorite trick of the aggrieved white, Christian, middle-class males that Ben Folds sings about.
:( Will repeat, it happens far more to minorities, I think white privilege exists. The only reason it was brought up was to show it is not solely an issue for some groups based on race, but for the life of me it is hard to understand why some are pushing back against that since is completely true. All races, genders, social classes have been profiled to one extent or another. That doesn't mean equally, which I indicated from the start.
-
Wah wahhhhhhh!
You think it is a good idea to label people racist whenever one feels like?
-
You think it is a good idea to label people racist whenever one feels like?
you're a racist just for asking
-
You think it is a good idea to label people racist whenever one feels like?
Yes.
-
You think it is a good idea to label people racist whenever one feels like?
Nope. I think it is a good idea to label people who act like racists as racists.
So when a reality-TV host says a U.S. born judge of Mexican heritage can't possibly be impartial, I agree with a prominent Wisconsin figure that it was "the textbook definition of a racist comment."
And who makes such racist comments?
Racists!
You know how 4ever (and maybe rocket, I can't remember exactly who said what) said something along the lines of if Brown didn't want to be tased, all he had to do was not park illegally? Well, something similar applies here.
If you don't want to be labeled a racist, don't say and do racist things.
Also, don't jump into a conversation about how blacks have been oppressed in America for hundreds of years by saying, "Yeah, but sometimes a white person has a rough time, too."
Personally, I like it when racists act like the racists they are. I like to know who the racists among us are.
-
C'mon man, you know I didn't say that. I said the entire situation would have been avoided had Brown legally parked.
-
C'mon man, you know I didn't say that. I said the entire situation would have been avoided had Brown legally parked.
Or if he stayed home. Or he if never played basketball. Or if his parents never had sex.
None of which is the point.
-
Once again, not true. He contolled everything until he chose to violate the law. At that point, the officers were in control and we all have seen the consequences of that. This is not that hard to comprehend.
-
C'mon man, you know I didn't say that. I said the entire situation would have been avoided had Brown legally parked.
If that girl didn't drink, she wouldn't have been gang raped by the football team.
-
This could go in a few threads here. Hillbilly Elegy, JD Vance, NY Times best seller. Ron Howard is turning this into a movie. Eye opening read and should be a wake up call. It touches on many topics brought up here from generational divide, racial, poverty, opioid addiction all here in the US from a modern perspective. Focuses on an area of Southern Ohio, poor steel town through the eyes of the author who grew up there as a self proclaimed hillbilly to the marines, then to Yale. Addresses what is happened largely to poor, white males in this country, at least from their perspective and how they are reacting. The cynicism that has embraced so many.
Anyone read it? I partly bring it up because this idea that so many are labeling people red necks or hillbillies or racists, it doesn't sting people anymore. It is a badge of honor for those people. They are digging in even further, while others are jumping on their train in my opinion. When everything and everyone is racist, it defeats the purpose and there is no hope to make folks see your view.
Strongly recommended as a view into what is going on in this country. NY Times, New Yorker, others recommend it, as do publications for those of you on the other side.
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-lives-of-poor-white-people
-
Once again, not true. He contolled everything until he chose to violate the law. At that point, the officers were in control and we all have seen the consequences of that. This is not that hard to comprehend.
Once again, you don’t get it.
Yes he violated the law by parking in a handicapped spot at 2:00 AM because he ran in to get cold medicine. He should have been given a ticket for that.
The Police f*cked up way more. I mean the entire incident was 99% on them and 1% on Brown. And you’ve decided to spend a great deal of energy focusing on the 1%.
Hmmmm. I wonder why???
-
Once again, not true. He contolled everything until he chose to violate the law. At that point, the officers were in control and we all have seen the consequences of that. This is not that hard to comprehend.
I'll use an example from my own experience to contrast with Sterling Brown's experience.
Several years ago I was at a friend's wedding in the Chicagoland area. My wife had went to bed and I gave a friend a ride back to his nearby hotel.
I returned to my hotel, got out of my car, and saw a police car with it's lights on. I wondered to myself what was going on. Then officer got out and told me to get back in my car.
Turns out I was the reason the officer was there. I was told I committed a minor traffic violation. I had no idea the officer had followed me back to my hotel and into the parking lot.
It was after midnight and I was briefly questioned about the incident and what I had to drink that night. The officer determined I was sober enough to drive and let me off with a warning for the other violation.
I have no idea how the officer would have treated me if I was black. But if a black was in my situation and was pulled over by the wrong officer, he is much more likely to be detained, beaten, tased, or possibly shot to death. And people like 4ever would be saying how it was that black man's fault for committing the traffic violation and getting out of his car.
That is the essence of white privilege. A white man that breaks the law has a wider margin of error than a black man that breaks the law.
That doesn't even address the unfair treatment of law abiding black Americans. There is a systemic problem in this country that needs to be fixed.
I recognize the dangers of police work. I've been on police ride-alongs in high crime areas. The overwhelming majority of police officers are good people. Unfortunately, we as a society have not done enough to weed out the bad ones.
So what are we going to do about the bad ones? That's the gist of this conversation. Yet some want to deflect attention from the officers and point the finger at Mr. Brown.
-
This could go in a few threads here. Hillbilly Elegy, JD Vance, NY Times best seller. Ron Howard is turning this into a movie. Eye opening read and should be a wake up call. It touches on many topics brought up here from generational divide, racial, poverty, opioid addiction all here in the US from a modern perspective. Focuses on an area of Southern Ohio, poor steel town through the eyes of the author who grew up there as a self proclaimed hillbilly to the marines, then to Yale. Addresses what is happened largely to poor, white males in this country, at least from their perspective and how they are reacting. The cynicism that has embraced so many.
Anyone read it? I partly bring it up because this idea that so many are labeling people red necks or hillbillies or racists, it doesn't sting people anymore. It is a badge of honor for those people. They are digging in even further, while others are jumping on their train in my opinion. When everything and everyone is racist, it defeats the purpose and there is no hope to make folks see your view.
Strongly recommended as a view into what is going on in this country. NY Times, New Yorker, others recommend it, as do publications for those of you on the other side.
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-lives-of-poor-white-people
1. A previous poster had similar viewpoints and pushed them regularly on the plight of whites in the US. Mostly as a deflection against obvious racism. Intriguing
2. I don't care if you're white, black, brown, red or green. Old, young. Rich, poor, middle class. Left, right. Teacher, doctor, police, homeless, actor, etc. Racism is bad. Racists are bad.
Red neck or hillbilly is not equivalent to racist. There are some that are racist. Just like every other subset of the population.
-
I'll dip a toe in even though I've mostly avoided page after page of argument while essentially zero progress is made.
Of course Suntan is right in that the Brown case is a 99% - 1% issue. Any reasonable person can see that.
What troubles me is that in today's era, too many folks seem so very committed to 'camps'. Meaning that somehow everything is a zero sum game. Seems to me that many (most) disagreements are like that today. Just to take a position on the other side for illustrative purposes , who doesn't fully understand that Peter Strzok is a completely compromised political hack and that any of his work product is 'damaged' to the point of uselessness?
What ever happened to the days when day was day and night was night and we all (mostly) agreed on 'facts' but recognized that the facts might lead to differing views on what to do about them? In that environment, learning and growth might be possible.
It gets really tiresome arguing with folks who never get off their position that the sun rises in the west because they say so. I guess my reaction mostly has been not to engage them. But isn't our society weakened when that happens?
-
I'll dip a toe in even though I've mostly avoided page after page of argument while essentially zero progress is made.
Of course Suntan is right in that the Brown case is a 99% - 1% issue. Any reasonable person can see that.
What troubles me is that in today's era, too many folks seem so very committed to 'camps'. Meaning that somehow everything is a zero sum game. Seems to me that many (most) disagreements are like that today. Just to take a position on the other side for illustrative purposes , who doesn't fully understand that Peter Strzok is a completely compromised political hack and that any of his work product is 'damaged' to the point of uselessness?
What ever happened to the days when day was day and night was night and we all (mostly) agreed on 'facts' but recognized that the facts might lead to differing views on what to do about them? In that environment, learning and growth might be possible.
It gets really tiresome arguing with folks who never get off their position that the sun rises in the west because they say so. I guess my reaction mostly has been not to engage them. But isn't our society weakened when that happens?
We are the Alternative Fact Nation now.
-
I'll dip a toe in even though I've mostly avoided page after page of argument while essentially zero progress is made.
Of course Suntan is right in that the Brown case is a 99% - 1% issue. Any reasonable person can see that.
What troubles me is that in today's era, too many folks seem so very committed to 'camps'. Meaning that somehow everything is a zero sum game. Seems to me that many (most) disagreements are like that today. Just to take a position on the other side for illustrative purposes , who doesn't fully understand that Peter Strzok is a completely compromised political hack and that any of his work product is 'damaged' to the point of uselessness?
What ever happened to the days when day was day and night was night and we all (mostly) agreed on 'facts' but recognized that the facts might lead to differing views on what to do about them? In that environment, learning and growth might be possible.
It gets really tiresome arguing with folks who never get off their position that the sun rises in the west because they say so. I guess my reaction mostly has been not to engage them. But isn't our society weakened when that happens?
I guess it depends on whether you are willing to accept that some of the things you accept as "facts" might be wrong? Or, do you just want others to come around to what you think? Because that's what it sounds like above.
-
I guess it depends on whether you are willing to accept that some of the things you accept as "facts" might be wrong? Or, do you just want others to come around to what you think? Because that's what it sounds like above.
Really? Aren't there things that are just obvious? Aren't those things 'facts'? And I think we should all be info to new info.
Let's change up the Brown situation for an example. Had the police been responding to a call about a 20 something black man robbing the Walgreens the situation would be completely different. The 'facts' would be different.
-
Really? Aren't there things that are just obvious? Aren't those things 'facts'? And I think we should all be info to new info.
Let's change up the Brown situation for an example. Had the police been responding to a call about a 20 something black man robbing the Walgreens the situation would be completely different. The 'facts' would be different.
You would think some things are just obvious (like the size of one crowd versus another) yet here we are.
-
You would think some things are just obvious (like the size of one crowd versus another) yet here we are.
I already find myself longing for the "good old days"when the lies being told and defended were as stupid (and innocuous) as the size of a crowd. The Trumpites and anti Trumpites have both graduated to bigger and better stuff.
-
I already find myself longing for the "good old days"when the lies being told and defended were as stupid (and innocuous) as the size of a crowd. The Trumpites and anti Trumpites have both graduated to bigger and better stuff.
Lol. No.
-
1. A previous poster had similar viewpoints and pushed them regularly on the plight of whites in the US. Mostly as a deflection against obvious racism. Intriguing
2. I don't care if you're white, black, brown, red or green. Old, young. Rich, poor, middle class. Left, right. Teacher, doctor, police, homeless, actor, etc. Racism is bad. Racists are bad.
Red neck or hillbilly is not equivalent to racist. There are some that are racist. Just like every other subset of the population.
Racism is more than bad. I come from the world where if you want to convince someone of your argument you don't belittle them. Both sides are so out of control, so distant, not like it was in my 20's and '30's. With both sides screaming the other is racist or unAmerican, well it will not end well.
-
I already find myself longing for the "good old days"when the lies being told and defended were as stupid (and innocuous) as the size of a crowd. The Trumpites and anti Trumpites have both graduated to bigger and better stuff.
Racism is more than bad. I come from the world where if you want to convince someone of your argument you don't belittle them. Both sides are so out of control, so distant, not like it was in my 20's and '30's. With both sides screaming the other is racist or unAmerican, well it will not end well.
Didn't think Lenny and chicos2 could agree on anything ... but IMHO both state false equivalence here.
-
http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catholic-social-teaching/seven-themes-of-catholic-social-teaching.cfm
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/pope-urges-broader-concept-life-ethics-abortion-56143701
Now is a good time to remind ourselves of some basic tenets of Catholic social teaching.
Catholic social teaching favors the poor, the downtrodden, the bullied, the immigrant. We are called to be our brothers' keepers and help the weakest. Nowhere does Catholic social teaching favor the bullies, the racists, the rich, the comfortable. The pope reminds us today that the Church's commitment to life does not end when a child is born. That we must care as much about the child after it leaves the uterus, that we must give to and lift up the poor. That the Catholic church protects all life.
In the end, we are all cafeteria Catholics, as I know almost know one who celebrates all facets of Catholic social teaching equally. But sometimes, when we start to lash out and marginalize, take a second and remember what we are called to be and who we are called to help.
-
NM
-
Didn't think Lenny and chicos2 could agree on anything ... but IMHO both state false equivalence here.
Mike,
Unlike Chico, I don't long for the '50s, when "Negroes" knew their place and gays were deeply closeted or horribly bullied.
My opinion of Donald Trump has always been clear. I think he's equal parts charlatan and vulgarian who will (given the opportunity) expose himself for what he is and be convincingly rejected. The only way he becomes more than a 4 year asterisk is if he can convince enough independents that he is a victim of unfair/biased treatment from our institutions. How ironic (and sad) if the press, in their zeal to discredit someone who would have self destructed, unwittingly becomes his ally.
-
The only way he becomes more than a 4 year asterisk is if he can convince enough independents that he is a victim of unfair/biased treatment from our institutions. How ironic (and sad) if the press, in their zeal to discredit someone who would have self destructed, unwittingly becomes his ally.
I think there's some good truth to this. In my job, we refer to "passive winning." That is, let incompetent people trip over their own feet and you've won without trying. The problem is, when there's someone as brazenly crooked as him occupying the presidency, how can you ignore the constant corruption and not report on it?
-
I think there's some good truth to this. In my job, we refer to "passive winning." That is, let incompetent people trip over their own feet and you've won without trying. The problem is, when there's someone as brazenly crooked as him occupying the presidency, how can you ignore the constant corruption and not report on it?
1. You can't
2. If, God forbid, he gets re-elected, it will not be the fault of the press for reporting on his brazen crookedness. It will be the fault of the people who vote for him in spite of his brazen crookedness. The notion that the press or anyone else needs to reign in their criticism of him lest it upset his bigoted base is truly awful. I'd rather endure four more years of Trump than a neutered fourth estate.
-
This is an interesting discussion.
I, of course, will point to my recently changed tag line and sit it out.
I'll hang up and listen!
P.S.: Lenny ... do forgive me for putting you in the same sentence as chicos. I won't do it again!
-
1. You can't
2. If, God forbid, he gets re-elected, it will not be the fault of the press for reporting on his brazen crookedness. It will be the fault of the people who vote for him in spite of his brazen crookedness. The notion that the press or anyone else needs to reign in their criticism of him lest it upset his bigoted base is truly awful. I'd rather endure four more years of Trump than a neutered fourth estate.
I'd agree the "media" should not take any steps to adapt to the Trump base, they are conditioned to not believe them anyway.
Separate from that, I do think the media does need to be careful at balancing speed to market, accuracy, and amplification of stories. I've seen a tendency to report news breathlessy but the story either isn't as "important" as reported or might be inaccurate in certain details (especially the ones sourced by "administration officials" - 538 had a great article on some of the sourcing discussion). At some point Trump will not be in power and I don't want to media conditioned to tip the scales.
Maybe another way to put this, I think(especially in TV media) we are seeing a blurring of reporting and opining which I think could be problematic long term.
-
I'd agree the "media" should not take any steps to adapt to the Trump base, they are conditioned to not believe them anyway.
Separate from that, I do think the media does need to be careful at balancing speed to market, accuracy, and amplification of stories. I've seen a tendency to report news breathlessy but the story either isn't as "important" as reported or might be inaccurate in certain details (especially the ones sourced by "administration officials" - 538 had a great article on some of the sourcing discussion). At some point Trump will not be in power and I don't want to media conditioned to tip the scales.
Maybe another way to put this, I think(especially in TV media) we are seeing a blurring of reporting and opining which I think could be problematic long term.
I think this is fair and accurate.
Regarding the sped to market, there is an immense amount of pressure on journalists in today's media environment to be first with stories or, if not first, not very far behind. The result of that can be (and too often has been) inaccurate or incomplete reporting. I don't cite that as an excuse, but as an explanation. The days of a reporter spending hours developing the story of the day are long gone. Often a story can go from source to publication/air in a matter of minutes.
-
I think this is fair and accurate.
Regarding the sped to market, there is an immense amount of pressure on journalists in today's media environment to be first with stories or, if not first, not very far behind. The result of that can be (and too often has been) inaccurate or incomplete reporting. I don't cite that as an excuse, but as an explanation. The days of a reporter spending hours developing the story of the day are long gone. Often a story can go from source to publication/air in a matter of minutes.
I completely agree. I'm not sure what the solution is but I think it has to come out of the media themselves. It isn't a new phenomenon, retractions always show up on page 17 for a page 1 story, but I think the media has to find a way to negate the need to be first. Additionally, I fear some of the tribalization of news "sources" impacts this as well. The ability to get news from a source friendly to your viewpoint is problematic.
-
Not sure what everybody means by "the media," but the tireless reporters and editors at the Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post are true American heroes these days.
-
http://www.newsweek.com/black-firefighter-questioned-videotaped-and-reported-police-while-conducting-994991
911 called over black firefighter doing his job.
A personal story. I was filling in as captain for a few months at a different station a couple of years ago. Our department was out doing building inspections. The crew on the other shift was two African American firefighters and one Caucasian female. They were performing an inspection and familiarizing themselves with a 6 story office building in our district. They were in uniform with the big red truck parked outside. Occupants of the building called our fire administration because they were concerned they were terrorists canvassing the building. When this story was relayed to me, the African American lieutenant involved had to physically restrain me from going and unloading on the a-hole who had called. He turned it into a joke, saying that clearly they were afraid of women firefighters.
-
http://www.newsweek.com/black-firefighter-questioned-videotaped-and-reported-police-while-conducting-994991
911 called over black firefighter doing his job.
A personal story. I was filling in as captain for a few months at a different station a couple of years ago. Our department was out doing building inspections. The crew on the other shift was two African American firefighters and one Caucasian female. They were performing an inspection and familiarizing themselves with a 6 story office building in our district. They were in uniform with the big red truck parked outside. Occupants of the building called our fire administration because they were concerned they were terrorists canvassing the building. When this story was relayed to me, the African American lieutenant involved had to physically restrain me from going and unloading on the a-hole who had called. He turned it into a joke, saying that clearly they were afraid of women firefighters.
That's an amazing story, tower. Not surprising, but amazing.
There will be some who claim that the presence of the white woman "proves" that there was no racial profiling involved.
-
http://www.newsweek.com/black-firefighter-questioned-videotaped-and-reported-police-while-conducting-994991
911 called over black firefighter doing his job.
A personal story. I was filling in as captain for a few months at a different station a couple of years ago. Our department was out doing building inspections. The crew on the other shift was two African American firefighters and one Caucasian female. They were performing an inspection and familiarizing themselves with a 6 story office building in our district. They were in uniform with the big red truck parked outside. Occupants of the building called our fire administration because they were concerned they were terrorists canvassing the building. When this story was relayed to me, the African American lieutenant involved had to physically restrain me from going and unloading on the a-hole who had called. He turned it into a joke, saying that clearly they were afraid of women firefighters.
It's too bad he stopped you from doing what you wanted to do.
This stuff will only end when WHITE people get pissed and speak up.
-
http://www.newsweek.com/black-firefighter-questioned-videotaped-and-reported-police-while-conducting-994991
911 called over black firefighter doing his job.
A personal story. I was filling in as captain for a few months at a different station a couple of years ago. Our department was out doing building inspections. The crew on the other shift was two African American firefighters and one Caucasian female. They were performing an inspection and familiarizing themselves with a 6 story office building in our district. They were in uniform with the big red truck parked outside. Occupants of the building called our fire administration because they were concerned they were terrorists canvassing the building. When this story was relayed to me, the African American lieutenant involved had to physically restrain me from going and unloading on the a-hole who had called. He turned it into a joke, saying that clearly they were afraid of women firefighters.
You can't be too careful, what with all those terrorist attacks from African American men and white women. If you see something; say something.
-
Not sure what everybody means by "the media," but the tireless reporters and editors at the Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post are true American heroes these days.
For the most part yes, but they are also part of the rat race that is trying to be the next Bernstein which doesn't always mean they get it right. Additionally, I get some sense that especially the TV media are setting themselves as an opposition to the Cheeto in Chief which I get at a personal level but if that colors the reporting I think you are doing a disservice to media. Report the facts and the context of why the story/facts are important and let the public decide if they need to oppose. Don't get me wrong, this isn't intended as a bash the media post, I'm simply saying that in my humble opinion the media is starting to blur the line between reporting and opining and that is a real tough line to unblur.
-
I completely agree. I'm not sure what the solution is but I think it has to come out of the media themselves. It isn't a new phenomenon, retractions always show up on page 17 for a page 1 story, but I think the media has to find a way to negate the need to be first. Additionally, I fear some of the tribalization of news "sources" impacts this as well. The ability to get news from a source friendly to your viewpoint is problematic.
I don't think you can (or should) negate the need to be first. While there's a downside to it, it's that kind of competitiveness that often drives the best reporting. As much as Woodward and Bernstein wanted to expose corruption in the Nixon Administration, they also wanted to kick the NY Times' rear sideways.
As far as getting news from sources friendly to your viewpoint, I don't think that's a new phenomenon. The tribalism of which you speak is perhaps worse than it was 30-40 years ago, but historically speaking, it's nothing like the first 150+ years of US history. The notion of an objective and unbiased news media is a relatively recent development in America.
-
Our village's police department has specifically communicated this: If you see something you think is odd, call 911 and we'll come figure it out. That's what we're here for.
We all have different thresholds for what we think is odd, not to mention a threshold of the fear of political correctness reprisal if we "wrongly" think something is odd.
-
Our village's police department has specifically communicated this: If you see something you think is odd, call 911 and we'll come figure it out. That's what we're here for.
We all have different thresholds for what we think is odd, not to mention a threshold of the fear of political correctness reprisal if we "wrongly" think something is odd.
The accusations of racism come when someone find it "odd" to see a black person engaging in perfectly normal behavior (like having a BBQ or being a firefighter or napping on a dormitory couch) that they wouldn't find so odd if a white person were doing it.
In such cases, it's not "odd" behavior that's leading people to calling police, it's the skin color of the person engaging in routine behavior.
-
I don't think you can (or should) negate the need to be first. While there's a downside to it, it's that kind of competitiveness that often drives the best reporting. As much as Woodward and Bernstein wanted to expose corruption in the Nixon Administration, they also wanted to kick the NY Times' rear sideways.
As far as getting news from sources friendly to your viewpoint, I don't think that's a new phenomenon. The tribalism of which you speak is perhaps worse than it was 30-40 years ago, but historically speaking, it's nothing like the first 150+ years of US history. The notion of an objective and unbiased news media is a relatively recent development in America.
Don't disagree for the most part. However the volume of friendly "news sources" has exploded of late so it becomes very difficult to find an amalgamated source of truth. this is where I think things like 538 are beneficial and I'd like to see more "just the facts" type of news sources. They don't have to be fast or first, but hey here's what we know of this story in the last 24/48/72 hours, what we know and what we don't. Unfortunately, there probably isn't a way to monetize but it'd be nice.
-
I don't think you can (or should) negate the need to be first. While there's a downside to it, it's that kind of competitiveness that often drives the best reporting. As much as Woodward and Bernstein wanted to expose corruption in the Nixon Administration, they also wanted to kick the NY Times' rear sideways.
Excellent point. We need to remember that The Post of the early '70s was still just a family newspaper and not the influential giant that it is today. Their reporting on Ellsberg and then Watergate shortly afterwards is what made them a national paper.
-
The accusations of racism come when someone find it "odd" to see a black person engaging in perfectly normal behavior (like having a BBQ or being a firefighter or napping on a dormitory couch) that they wouldn't find so odd if a white person were doing it.
In such cases, it's not "odd" behavior that's leading people to calling police, it's the skin color of the person engaging in routine behavior.
Or being a child selling bottles of water.
-
For the most part yes, but they are also part of the rat race that is trying to be the next Bernstein which doesn't always mean they get it right. Additionally, I get some sense that especially the TV media are setting themselves as an opposition to the Cheeto in Chief which I get at a personal level but if that colors the reporting I think you are doing a disservice to media. Report the facts and the context of why the story/facts are important and let the public decide if they need to oppose. Don't get me wrong, this isn't intended as a bash the media post, I'm simply saying that in my humble opinion the media is starting to blur the line between reporting and opining and that is a real tough line to unblur.
I don't think you can (or should) negate the need to be first. While there's a downside to it, it's that kind of competitiveness that often drives the best reporting. As much as Woodward and Bernstein wanted to expose corruption in the Nixon Administration, they also wanted to kick the NY Times' rear sideways.
As far as getting news from sources friendly to your viewpoint, I don't think that's a new phenomenon. The tribalism of which you speak is perhaps worse than it was 30-40 years ago, but historically speaking, it's nothing like the first 150+ years of US history. The notion of an objective and unbiased news media is a relatively recent development in America.
Good discussion, guys. Thanks.
I tend to separate TV from newspapers. While newspapers want to compete and sell subscriptions, that is a far different driver than what TV networks face. The TV folks also blur the lines much more readily. With newspapers, it is usually (not always, but usually) obvious what is a fact-filled article and what is opinion/analysis.
Of course newspapers occasionally get something wrong. When they do, they run corrections. Contrast that to the way politicians get things wrong all the time ... and rarely admit it.
I have been most pleasantly surprised by the WSJ. Although their owner is compromised from a bias standpoint, their reporters and editors have done a great job these last couple of years. The Times and Post ... we'd be at the mercy of the powers-that-be without them.
-
The accusations of racism come when someone find it "odd" to see a black person engaging in perfectly normal behavior (like having a BBQ or being a firefighter or napping on a dormitory couch) that they wouldn't find so odd if a white person were doing it.
In such cases, it's not "odd" behavior that's leading people to calling police, it's the skin color of the person engaging in routine behavior.
ok, as we are finding quite a few examples, it seems, of more stupid, racist people being stupid and racist, how can these be resolved? what can we do to do better?
we seem quick to continue to point these out, but no one, including me, has any answers. i'm hoping these situations are less than they were, say 10, 20, 30...years ago. we are human and that means we are imperfect. there will always be room for more improvement. but if we are all sitting here waiting for an answer...i'm all ears. i always say, "things" happen for a reason...why are these "things" happening? i'm hoping they are occuring in order to bring the goodness out of those who care and to shine the light on the idiots hoping public condemnation allows some to become more aware to the stupidity of their ways
-
Pointing them out and not letting them go unchallenged is a step. Educating how actions and words can be interpreted as racist is a step. It will take the changing of hearts and educating the minds and hearts of the young. If one wants to change one must look inward and examine thoughts and actions and accept personal failings and make the choice to change.
-
ok, as we are finding quite a few examples, it seems, of more stupid, racist people being stupid and racist, how can these be resolved? what can we do to do better?
we seem quick to continue to point these out, but no one, including me, has any answers. i'm hoping these situations are less than they were, say 10, 20, 30...years ago. we are human and that means we are imperfect. there will always be room for more improvement. but if we are all sitting here waiting for an answer...i'm all ears. i always say, "things" happen for a reason...why are these "things" happening? i'm hoping they are occuring in order to bring the goodness out of those who care and to shine the light on the idiots hoping public condemnation allows some to become more aware to the stupidity of their ways
Surface any and everything of this nature in a constructive way. If you see something, say something, especially when you are in the majority. There is some argument to be had for sure but the problem really only gets fixed by white people not accepting casual or accidental racism or any other ism
-
Surface any and everything of this nature in a constructive way. If you see something, say something, especially when you are in the majority. There is some argument to be had for sure but the problem really only gets fixed by white people not accepting casual or accidental racism or any other ism
Also, refusing to accept or explain away stuff like "grew up in a different time", "thats how it was where i grew up", etc... That doesnt mean you have to shout RACIST at people who lack exposure or understanding of why things are inherently racist, offensive, etc... but allowing that to be an excuse or a shoo away for such behavior leads to it unintentionally labeled as ok or an exception, instead of stopping it dead.
-
Also, refusing to accept or explain away stuff like "grew up in a different time", "thats how it was where i grew up", etc... That doesnt mean you have to shout RACIST at people who lack exposure or understanding of why things are inherently racist, offensive, etc... but allowing that to be an excuse or a shoo away for such behavior leads to it unintentionally labeled as ok or an exception, instead of stopping it dead.
Honestly this might be the most accurate thing that explains why theres no legitimate dialogue. Half the people out there think jokes,
Accepting institutional disadvantages, etc are not racist because the way they grew up, racism meant lynching and being pro separate but equal. The lines moved and those on the non racist side are too busy screaming racist to simply explain hey times have changed what's considered racist is less now. (That being said you then have a percentage of people who'd say they're sick of PC culture and those people are just looking for reasons to be jerks)
-
Honestly this might be the most accurate thing that explains why theres no legitimate dialogue. Half the people out there think jokes,
Accepting institutional disadvantages, etc are not racist because the way they grew up, racism meant lynching and being pro separate but equal. The lines moved and those on the non racist side are too busy screaming racist to simply explain hey times have changed what's considered racist is less now. (That being said you then have a percentage of people who'd say they're sick of PC culture and those people are just looking for reasons to be jerks)
While I am sure some people do it for that reason, I think the majority do it because they are threatened by the changing dynamics. They really do not know how to cope with the changes so that and other comments/actions similar to that are their defense mechanism.
-
(That being said you then have a percentage of people who'd say they're sick of PC culture and those people are just looking for reasons to be jerks)
That, and its harder. You're asking people to change behavior they don't deem to be offensive on the basis of a lack of understanding or education about something. Some of them are just looking for reasons to be jerks, sure, but there is also a disconnect about the idea that sometimes you dont get to be the arbiter of what is offensive. I remember an elderly relative commenting how she was helped earlier that day by "the nice colored man at the grocery store". She's not a virulent racist, and she was being complimentary, but its still wrong and inherently disrespectful. But trying to explain it away based on age, or saying "well then why is the NAACP named as such then, it must be ok", is what perpetuates problems.
Hell, I used to use gay as an adjective all the time when I was a teenager. I wasn't a bigot, I didn't have deeper meaning behind it...but I grew to realize that problem with it, the impact that kind of speech has, and stopped saying it...as opposed to trying to say "i dont mean anything by it. Its not meant to be offensive, its no big deal, get over it".
-
ok, as we are finding quite a few examples, it seems, of more stupid, racist people being stupid and racist, how can these be resolved? what can we do to do better?
we seem quick to continue to point these out, but no one, including me, has any answers. i'm hoping these situations are less than they were, say 10, 20, 30...years ago. we are human and that means we are imperfect. there will always be room for more improvement. but if we are all sitting here waiting for an answer...i'm all ears. i always say, "things" happen for a reason...why are these "things" happening? i'm hoping they are occuring in order to bring the goodness out of those who care and to shine the light on the idiots hoping public condemnation allows some to become more aware to the stupidity of their ways
Simple. If you see something you think is odd, ask yourself, would I still think it was odd if it was a man/woman, white/asian/black etc.
If you decide, no, it would be perfectly normal if it was a white male, then don't call the cops. If you call the cops anyway, simply because of the color of their skin, you're a racist.
-
Pointing them out and not letting them go unchallenged is a step. Educating how actions and words can be interpreted as racist is a step. It will take the changing of hearts and educating the minds and hearts of the young. If one wants to change one must look inward and examine thoughts and actions and accept personal failings and make the choice to change.
This is important, but it's admittedly difficult to do.
An acquaintance of mine - not really a good friend, but we will have a beer or 3 after umpiring together - is a racist. He probably doesn't think he is, but he is. I call him on it: "C'mon, Fred, that's unacceptable." Obviously, I'm not "changing" him. But at least I'm not letting it pass unchecked.
A few years back, I was waiting for my softball game to start when one of my teammates started chatting with me. He made a comment about a player in the game before ours, came right out and used the n-word. I said, "Joe, I'm not going to stand for that. Don't be a racist." You know what he said? "What? I looked around and made sure none of 'em were around who coulda heard me." All I could think to say was: "STFU and get the eff out of here." I never looked at him the same way. He was considered a "good guy" by others, but I told them about our exchange. I didn't care if I was being a "rat." Racists aren't very fine people, and they deserve to be outed.
-
I have had parallel experiences. And I, too, cannot look at them the same way ever again.
-
Malcolm Gladwell might not be everyone's cup of tea but I thought this was an outstanding episode of his podcast, in part because I had no awareness of the Nixon-Sammy relationship
http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/26-the-hug-heard-round-the-world (http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/26-the-hug-heard-round-the-world)
-
Honestly this might be the most accurate thing that explains why theres no legitimate dialogue. Half the people out there think jokes,
Accepting institutional disadvantages, etc are not racist because the way they grew up, racism meant lynching and being pro separate but equal. The lines moved and those on the non racist side are too busy screaming racist to simply explain hey times have changed what's considered racist is less now. (That being said you then have a percentage of people who'd say they're sick of PC culture and those people are just looking for reasons to be jerks)
all good stuff bags, however, the PC culture bares some responsibility here as well. as most will admit, the PC culture has gotten out hand and has become a lazy way to stamp out anything in between. it(PC movement) has taken away the ability or need for people to have conversations. to respectfully reason with others, trying to come to an acceptable and respectful conclusion as opposed to a "rules are rules" approach. the PC culture needs to temper it's approach and recognize that there is room to maneuver and work with those who see things differently. short of that, is what creates the animosity and then all chit hits the fan and no progress is made
-
all good stuff bags, however, the PC culture bares some responsibility here as well. as most will admit, the PC culture has gotten out hand and has become a lazy way to stamp out anything in between. it(PC movement) has taken away the ability or need for people to have conversations. to respectfully reason with others, trying to come to an acceptable and respectful conclusion as opposed to a "rules are rules" approach. the PC culture needs to temper it's approach and recognize that there is room to maneuver and work with those who see things differently. short of that, is what creates the animosity and then all chit hits the fan and no progress is made
No, "PC Culture" has become the go-to punching bag for a certain wing who whine that they can't say offensive sh!t without being called out.
-
No, "PC Culture" has become the go-to punching bag for a certain wing who whine that they can't say offensive sh!t without being called out.
I don't totally agree there. There is absolutely(most online in my experience) a culture which is suppressive of discussion in a antagonistic way. There is an absolute need for those who might be offended by something to bring the gap. You can call someone out in a nice way assuming what was said is more out of ignorance than deliberate belief.
-
No, "PC Culture" has become the go-to punching bag for a certain wing who whine that they can't say offensive sh!t without being called out.
Let's be honest. There is at least some truth to it.
Have you ever wanted to ask a simple question about an acquaintance's culture or ethnicity, but didn't, because you were afraid it would be labeled as bigoted or racist?
If you are reluctant to start a conversation, even about something as benign as hairstyles, doesn't that hinder understanding?
I had an African-American friend in high school, and I felt comfortable asking him things like, "Have you ever gotten a sunburn?". I would never risk asking a question like that now unless I was very close friends with the person.
-
all good stuff bags, however, the PC culture bares some responsibility here as well. as most will admit, the PC culture has gotten out hand and has become a lazy way to stamp out anything in between. it(PC movement) has taken away the ability or need for people to have conversations. to respectfully reason with others, trying to come to an acceptable and respectful conclusion as opposed to a "rules are rules" approach. the PC culture needs to temper it's approach and recognize that there is room to maneuver and work with those who see things differently. short of that, is what creates the animosity and then all chit hits the fan and no progress is made
Just when I think you’re learning, you go back to the same old talking point. #sad
-
Let's be honest. There is at least some truth to it.
Have you ever wanted to ask a simple question about an acquaintance's culture or ethnicity, but didn't, because you were afraid it would be labeled as bigoted or racist?
If you are reluctant to start a conversation, even about something as benign as hairstyles, doesn't that hinder understanding?
I had an African-American friend in high school, and I felt comfortable asking him things like, "Have you ever gotten a sunburn?". I would never risk asking a question like that now unless I was very close friends with the person.
Stop using crutches people. Good lord.
-
Stop using crutches people. Good lord.
Agree - these are limits people put on themselves.
As long as you are asking questions from a position of honest interest people are going to answer honestly.
-
Stop using crutches people. Good lord.
Are you disputing that sometimes a perfectly innocent question can be taken as culturally insensitive, and that people who are aware of that potential may decide not to ask it?
-
Are you disputing that sometimes a perfectly innocent question can be taken as culturally insensitive, and that people who are aware of that potential may decide not to ask it?
Look people get offended at all sorts of crap. Others don’t. It has nothing to do with “PC culture.” It’s because individuals have different tolerances for being offended.
Blaming “PC culture” is the same bullsh*t that people have been trotting out for 25 years.
-
I think "PC culture" is a crutch. Getting fired because you call a black person ape-like is not the "PC police" being abusive.
However, I do think things run amok sometimes. This trend of libs shouting down or totally preventing anybody to speak on college campuses if they don't totally support their views ... that's wrong. I'm not sure "PC culture" is the right thing to blame, though.
There's nothing PC about intolerance.
But let's not paint false equivalences here. There are people who support those in very high places who love to blame the "PC culture" anytime there is backlash to obviously racist actions and comments.
-
Are you disputing that sometimes a perfectly innocent question can be taken as culturally insensitive, and that people who are aware of that potential may decide not to ask it?
Well, if they're aware that their question can be taken as culturally insensitive, can't they just find a way to ask in another way? Seems like a more productive alternative than whining about how "PC culture" won't allow them to ask potentially insensitive questions.
-
It goes both ways.
Many people blame "PC Culture" when they want a pass for saying/doing something offensive.
Many other people take political correctness too far and cry racism/sexism/intolerance seemingly every chance they get.
Rosanne getting fired for making racist comments on Twitter? Nothing to do with "PC Culture."
Doug Adler getting fired for using the term "guerilla" to describe Serena's play? Absolutely a result of "PC Culture."
-
all good stuff bags, however, the PC culture bares some responsibility here as well. as most will admit, the PC culture has gotten out hand and has become a lazy way to stamp out anything in between. it(PC movement) has taken away the ability or need for people to have conversations. to respectfully reason with others, trying to come to an acceptable and respectful conclusion as opposed to a "rules are rules" approach. the PC culture needs to temper it's approach and recognize that there is room to maneuver and work with those who see things differently. short of that, is what creates the animosity and then all chit hits the fan and no progress is made
I agree with what you're saying. But as far as what a respectful and acceptable Compromise we may disagree. To me, life is better knowing I didn't make someone else's day worse because I wanted to tell an off color joke in front of them, that being said in front of close friends where you all understand each other's humor I'm all for anything goes humor. I think an issue generally starts on social media (or message boards) where people don't understand where everyone is coming from and some would rather fight for the right to retain off humor rather than accept that the world isn't filled with people who you have over for a party and some are thick skinned some are thin.
That being said I agree there are some aspects of that sensitive culture that have gotten ridiculous.
-
Are you disputing that sometimes a perfectly innocent question can be taken as culturally insensitive, and that people who are aware of that potential may decide not to ask it?
Personal opinion only here, but I don't think anyone should be afraid to ask a question where the intent is to learn. It might not stop someone from being offended, but I think framing up the question properly and telling the person why you are asking it goes an awfully long way towards reducing that chance.
-
I don't totally agree there. There is absolutely(most online in my experience) a culture which is suppressive of discussion in a antagonistic way.
Sure there is, I don't disagree at all. But IMO, there isn't equivalency either in the size of the groups (the anti-PC brigade vs. the overzealous PC contingent) nor in impact, nor for that matter is the relative morality of what those two sides are fighting for.
-
I think "PC culture" is a crutch. Getting fired because you call a black person ape-like is not the "PC police" being abusive.
However, I do think things run amok sometimes. This trend of libs shouting down or totally preventing anybody to speak on college campuses if they don't totally support their views ... that's wrong. I'm not sure "PC culture" is the right thing to blame, though.
There's nothing PC about intolerance.
But let's not paint false equivalences here. There are people who support those in very high places who love to blame the "PC culture" anytime there is backlash to obviously racist actions and comments.
I think you hit the main points here. "PC culture" is a crutch. People in high places who are racist use it to justify blatant racist actions and statements.
But they get away with it, because of some elements that have gone too far. The ones I would say are getting out of hand usually revolve around "cultural appropriation," where we have cases of 18-year old girls being attacked on the internet and shamed for wearing an asian-inspired dress to prom.
That's absurd, and give ammunition to the people who use "PC culture" as a crutch.
-
But they get away with it, because of some elements that have gone too far. The ones I would say are getting out of hand usually revolve around "cultural appropriation," where we have cases of 18-year old girls being attacked on the internet and shamed for wearing an asian-inspired dress to prom.
Recently there was a white fashion model who appeared on the cover of Black Hair magazine. She was excoriated for it, even though she had signed a general model's release for the photo and had no idea how it was going to be used. She wound up publicly apologizing for "cultural appropriation".
She had naturally curly hair which was not changed in any way for the photo.
-
Recently there was a white fashion model who appeared on the cover of Black Hair magazine. She was excoriated for it, even though she had signed a general model's release for the photo and had no idea how it was going to be used. She wound up publicly apologizing for "cultural appropriation".
She had naturally curly hair which was not changed in any way for the photo.
1. She should not have apologized.
2. Why was she attacked rather than the editor of the magazine who put her on the cover?
In reality, neither did anything wrong. Whiners gonna whine. We should not enable them.
-
In reality, neither did anything wrong. Whiners gonna whine. We should not enable them.
Speaking of whiners, some very triggered Star Wars fans have declared "rebellion" on Lucasfilm and Disney because they new trilogy is apparently PC and pushing "an agenda of masculine inferiority."
Read the manifesto. It's pure gold.
https://news.avclub.com/a-small-group-of-star-wars-fans-has-declared-rebellion-1827172702
Manifesto:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DeyZB2JVMAALvqr.jpg:large
-
Speaking of whiners, some very triggered Star Wars fans have declared "rebellion" on Lucasfilm and Disney because they new trilogy is apparently PC and pushing "an agenda of masculine inferiority."
Read the manifesto. It's pure gold.
https://news.avclub.com/a-small-group-of-star-wars-fans-has-declared-rebellion-1827172702
Manifesto:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DeyZB2JVMAALvqr.jpg:large
That's funny. Maybe they can march with the fools who are boycotting Disney over their support of same-sex marriage.. Like I said, whiners gonna whine.
-
While the following scenario doesn't deal with MU, it most definitely deals with white privilege (and discrimination) and the way it is institutionalized:
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/banking/article213862554.html?#emlnl=Business_Newsletter&id=bWlrZW5hZGVsQHNiY2dsb2JhbC5uZXQ=
The lead:
Bank of America intentionally failed to maintain homes it foreclosed on in black and Latino neighborhoods across dozens of U.S. markets, while consistently caring for similar properties in white neighborhoods, according to a federal lawsuit filed this week.
BoA is denying it, of course; they always do. They'll have a chance to prove if the case is without merit.
-
While the following scenario doesn't deal with MU, it most definitely deals with white privilege (and discrimination) and the way it is institutionalized:
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/banking/article213862554.html?#emlnl=Business_Newsletter&id=bWlrZW5hZGVsQHNiY2dsb2JhbC5uZXQ=
The lead:
Bank of America intentionally failed to maintain homes it foreclosed on in black and Latino neighborhoods across dozens of U.S. markets, while consistently caring for similar properties in white neighborhoods, according to a federal lawsuit filed this week.
BoA is denying it, of course; they always do. They'll have a chance to prove if the case is without merit.
In all seriousness, welcome to racism buried in algorithms. Not intentional racism, but the data sets they are using doesn't normalize for race concerns which by default means race becomes a contributor to the output.
-
In all seriousness, welcome to racism buried in algorithms. Not intentional racism, but the data sets they are using doesn't normalize for race concerns which by default means race becomes a contributor to the output.
Yep. It's institutionalized and constantly seeps into everyday American life.
Each of us who is white won a lottery the day we were born to white parents. Those of us who have had successful lives maximized our lottery "winnings." Those of us who failed did what many lottery winners have done and frittered away our advantages. But we did win the lottery.
-
Speaking of whiners, some very triggered Star Wars fans have declared "rebellion" on Lucasfilm and Disney because they new trilogy is apparently PC and pushing "an agenda of masculine inferiority."
Read the manifesto. It's pure gold.
https://news.avclub.com/a-small-group-of-star-wars-fans-has-declared-rebellion-1827172702
Manifesto:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DeyZB2JVMAALvqr.jpg:large
Yeah, if we're going to unpackage the Star Wars stuff we are going to end up down a very tangent path but it is a very interesting reflection of our current environment.
*Noted for the record, I am an unrepentant Star Wars nerd.
I think it's far to characterize Star Wars fandom into the following groups:
1. Outright racists, misogynist and any other ist that isn't white male
2. People who hate that Star Wars is "corporate"
3. People with legitimate creative objections to the direction of Star Wars or with particular characters, etc
4. People who like/love the current and past content
It's hard to tell what the breakdown of the groups is percentage wise but part of the issue is there are people in multiple camps and generically content creators/Lucasfilm are treating anyone in group 3 as if they are part of group 1. Mix in the complete $hitshow that is social media for these elements and it makes it a mess. If you removed the social media aspect, I truly believe things aren't nearly as toxic as they appear (or at least as universally toxic).
-
While the following scenario doesn't deal with MU, it most definitely deals with white privilege (and discrimination) and the way it is institutionalized:
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/banking/article213862554.html?#emlnl=Business_Newsletter&id=bWlrZW5hZGVsQHNiY2dsb2JhbC5uZXQ=
The lead:
Bank of America intentionally failed to maintain homes it foreclosed on in black and Latino neighborhoods across dozens of U.S. markets, while consistently caring for similar properties in white neighborhoods, according to a federal lawsuit filed this week.
BoA is denying it, of course; they always do. They'll have a chance to prove if the case is without merit.
Help me understand this one though: doesn't letting property you (BoA) own fall into disrepair ultimately simply hurt the resale value and thus your profits? Is this an allocation of capital thing that they are calculating that with limited resources it is more profitable to maintain some houses rather than others?? In other words, if the cost to maintain the house > than the amount by which the price will decline, then they don't bother?
-
Yeah, if we're going to unpackage the Star Wars stuff we are going to end up down a very tangent path but it is a very interesting reflection of our current environment.
*Noted for the record, I am an unrepentant Star Wars nerd.
I think it's far to characterize Star Wars fandom into the following groups:
1. Outright racists, misogynist and any other ist that isn't white male
2. People who hate that Star Wars is "corporate"
3. People with legitimate creative objections to the direction of Star Wars or with particular characters, etc
4. People who like/love the current and past content
It's hard to tell what the breakdown of the groups is percentage wise but part of the issue is there are people in multiple camps and generically content creators/Lucasfilm are treating anyone in group 3 as if they are part of group 1. Mix in the complete $hitshow that is social media for these elements and it makes it a mess. If you removed the social media aspect, I truly believe things aren't nearly as toxic as they appear (or at least as universally toxic).
There's obviously nothing wrong with being in group three, and people in that group ought to feel free to criticize/object/complain to their heart's content without being disparaged as basement-dwelling neckbearbs. Or, better yet, simply voting with their dollars.
But with nerd culture in general, and Star Wars in particular, there seems to be a deeply ingrained sense of entitlement among many of the critics. The complaints seem to go well beyond simply disagreeing with the creative choice. It's more like outright anger that the creative choices are different from the ones they would have made, and those differences are a personal affront.
Like fans of anything (sports, music, etc.) fans take some sense of ownership in the product, and that's normal and fine. But the sense of ownership among some of these people in particular seems way outsized.
-
There's obviously nothing wrong with being in group three, and people in that group ought to feel free to criticize/object/complain to their heart's content without being disparaged as basement-dwelling neckbearbs. Or, better yet, simply voting with their dollars.
But with nerd culture in general, and Star Wars in particular, there seems to be a deeply ingrained sense of entitlement among many some of the critics. The complaints seem to go well beyond simply disagreeing with the creative choice. It's more like outright anger that the creative choices are different from the ones they would have made, and those differences are a personal affront.
Like fans of anything (sports, music, etc.) fans take some sense of ownership in the product, and that's normal and fine. But the sense of ownership among some of these people in particular seems way outsized.
I made what I think is a fix, but I guess we really don't know especially with the internet involved (how many trolls take over the basketball page during the season around here?). One of the defining characteristics of Star Wars fandom(in my experience) is debate/discussion of what everything means which I think is some of this but it's also that taken to a bad extreme.
-
Help me understand this one though: doesn't letting property you (BoA) own fall into disrepair ultimately simply hurt the resale value and thus your profits? Is this an allocation of capital thing that they are calculating that with limited resources it is more profitable to maintain some houses rather than others?? In other words, if the cost to maintain the house > than the amount by which the price will decline, then they don't bother?
It is certainly closer to the truth than the folks who say it is pure racism. You are talking about a significant part of Glow's professional expertise here (although he dealt more with commercial collateral than home foreclosures).
-
I agree with what you're saying. But as far as what a respectful and acceptable Compromise we may disagree. To me, life is better knowing I didn't make someone else's day worse because I wanted to tell an off color joke in front of them, that being said in front of close friends where you all understand each other's humor I'm all for anything goes humor. I think an issue generally starts on social media (or message boards) where people don't understand where everyone is coming from and some would rather fight for the right to retain off humor rather than accept that the world isn't filled with people who you have over for a party and some are thick skinned some are thin.
That being said I agree there are some aspects of that sensitive culture that have gotten ridiculous.
thanks bags, the way you go about respectfully seeing my point without denigrating me personally is a refreshing approach on this board for a change. as for your point, i absolutely agree that people need to have some self control. know when to tell the off color joke or as chick pointed out, know someone well enough to ask an honest question.
-
Help me understand this one though: doesn't letting property you (BoA) own fall into disrepair ultimately simply hurt the resale value and thus your profits? Is this an allocation of capital thing that they are calculating that with limited resources it is more profitable to maintain some houses rather than others?? In other words, if the cost to maintain the house > than the amount by which the price will decline, then they don't bother?
Hmmm. Interesting thoughts.
-
Yes. People can be racist against their own race.
From my perspective this is true. I feel more comfortable with white pilots and I definitely walk on the other side of the street when I see someone from my own race with a certain street punk type look.
On the other hand I do not trust the white police at all. I do everything I can not to provoke them. I always use cruise control when on highways for example.
-
From my perspective this is true. I feel more comfortable with white pilots and I definitely walk on the other side of the street when I see someone from my own race with a certain street punk type look.
On the other hand I do not trust the white police at all. I do everything I can not to provoke them. I always use cruise control when on highways for example.
Wow.
Do you ever see a white person with a "certain street punk type look"? And if so, do you "walk on the other side of the street"?
Do you trust the black police?
-
From my perspective this is true. I feel more comfortable with white pilots and I definitely walk on the other side of the street when I see someone from my own race with a certain street punk type look.
So blacks are too stupid to be pilots?
Sorry, but I think you are a liar and a fraud.
-
So blacks are too stupid to be pilots?
Sorry, but I think you are a liar and a fraud.
I am from the old school and believe in all the stereotypes until proven wrong . I learned that people hold these feelings inside anyway. So I don't get all riled up and offended the way the guilty white folk do.
That is how I live my life and it has served me very well.
I have a lot of friends, a great family, done well for the community and achieved considerable wealth. Never once had to rely on a minority set aside or affirmative action or any of that crap.
Work hard and treat people fairly. Everyone needs to get over their guilt and go about their daily business.
-
I am from the old school and believe in all the stereotypes until proven wrong . I learned that people hold these feelings inside anyway. So I don't get all riled up and offended the way the guilty white folk do.
That is how I live my life and it has served me very well.
I have a lot of friends, a great family, done well for the community and achieved considerable wealth. Never once had to rely on a minority set aside or affirmative action or any of that crap.
Work hard and treat people fairly. Everyone needs to get over their guilt and go about their daily business.
There's a few girls you got drunk you should feel guilty about
-
Work hard and treat people fairly, get girls drunk to have unprotected sex, make sock puppets to agree with myself.
Fixed it for you. What a fake.
-
would this be a modern day example of "white privilege"?
http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/23938797/chris-bosio-says-was-sued-tigers-misunderstanding
there has got to be more to this story- either bosio is lying or people in the clubhouse are lying or they needed a reason they felt would hold up to public scrutiny so they could get rid of bosio? the boz has been involved with MLB since 1986 without incident as far as i know
-
would this be a modern day example of "white privilege"?
http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/23938797/chris-bosio-says-was-sued-tigers-misunderstanding
there has got to be more to this story- either bosio is lying or people in the clubhouse are lying or they needed a reason they felt would hold up to public scrutiny so they could get rid of bosio? the boz has been involved with MLB since 1986 without incident as far as i know
Please explain why you think this would be an example of white privilege? What "privilege" is Bosio receiving as a result of his skin color?
-
Please explain why you think this would be an example of white privilege? What "privilege" is Bosio receiving as a result of his skin color?
You know what one of these ? Means, right? No further questions... :o
-
I am from the old school and believe in all the stereotypes until proven wrong .
You are from the old interwebs school of being a make-believe person.
Several of us suspected as much. This clinches it.
-
You know what one of these ? Means, right? No further questions... :o
It is not an example of white privilege. I’m not sure yet what it is an example of.
-
You know what one of these ? Means, right? No further questions... :o
Um. Okay. Thanks for the punctuation lesson.
Now, I'll fix it in the event that you want to respond and have a real conversation.
Please explain why you think this would be an example of white privilege. What "privilege" is Bosio receiving as a result of his skin color?
-
You are from the old interwebs school of being a make-believe person.
Several of us suspected as much. This clinches it.
You hold yourself out as a pious person yet you literally peed your pants when the neighbors put Christmas ornaments on their tree. I am willing to admit to my prejudices.
-
You hold yourself out as a pious person yet you literally peed your pants when the neighbors put Christmas ornaments on their tree. I am willing to admit to my prejudices.
Do you have any prejudices about girls you feed alcohol so you can take them back to your place?
-
Um. Okay. Thanks for the punctuation lesson.
Now, I'll fix it in the event that you want to respond and have a real conversation.
you asked me to explain why this would be an example of "white privilege". i never said it was an example of "white privilege" i was asking the question myself and sully actually gave me his opinion at least.
for me, if this is "white privilege", i don't want any part of it. i guess boz should learn how to either check out his surroundings before speaking or not talk so loud, eyn'er there jes baby?
-
you asked me to explain why this would be an example of "white privilege". i never said it was an example of "white privilege" i was asking the question myself and sully actually gave me his opinion at least.
for me, if this is "white privilege", i don't want any part of it. i guess boz should learn how to either check out his surroundings before speaking or not talk so loud, eyn'er there jes baby?
My apologies. I thought your original question was implying that you believed it was white privilege.
No. This is not white privilege.
And if you're questioning if it's white privilege - and you really weren't sure - then I don't think you understand at all what this is about.
-
You hold yourself out as a pious person yet you literally peed your pants when the neighbors put Christmas ornaments on their tree. I am willing to admit to my prejudices.
1. You obviously don't know the meaning of the word "literally."
2. It was our tree not theirs.
3. You are not a real person.
-
1. You obviously don't know the meaning of the word "literally."
2. It was our tree not theirs.
3. You are not a real person.
Doesn’t matter whose tree it was . You were biased against Christ. You had other problems with prayer on your basketball team and your a self admitted athiest. Just admit you have your set of issues before you cast aspersions on others.
Also I don’t need anyone’s charity. Nobody ever gave me any and I am better off for it. George Bush 43 was correct in describing the “soft bigotry of low expectations”. That is what all you white liberals have when it comes to your patronizing and idle chatter about white privilege.
Ps Sherrif David Clarke is an American hero in my book. He tells it like it is.
-
Doesn’t matter whose tree it was . You were biased against Christ. You had other problems with prayer on your basketball team and your a self admitted athiest. Just admit you have your set of issues before you cast aspersions on others.
Also I don’t need anyone’s charity. Nobody ever gave me any and I am better off for it. George Bush 43 was correct in describing the “soft bigotry of low expectations”. That is what all you white liberals have when it comes to your patronizing and idle chatter about white privilege.
Ps Sherrif David Clarke is an American hero in my book. He tells it like it is.
Yeah you’re trying too hard.
-
Doesn’t matter whose tree it was . You were biased against Christ. You had other problems with prayer on your basketball team and your a self admitted athiest. Just admit you have your set of issues before you cast aspersions on others.
Also I don’t need anyone’s charity. Nobody ever gave me any and I am better off for it. George Bush 43 was correct in describing the “soft bigotry of low expectations”. That is what all you white liberals have when it comes to your patronizing and idle chatter about white privilege.
Ps Sherrif David Clarke is an American hero in my book. He tells it like it is.
Is Clarke also a fan of getting young women intentionally drunk so he can have unprotected sex with them?