Do you really want to know or do you want to get defensive about it?
Because if the former, I think it's more helpful to go back and do it as an exercise in self-analysis. Look at every time the argument is structured around attributing specific, negative characteristics or behaviors to "they/them." Consider what characteristics are being attributed and who "they/them" is meant to represent. Further consider what underlying assumptions and logical shortcuts are being taken to reach particular conclusions in the argument, and what attitudes those assumptions might reflect.
I'm actually not defensive at all. As I said I am curious. I used "they/them" referring to the group BLM as a whole. We are talking about a group of people. Typically in the english language when referring to a group (in general) using they/them to refer to the group you're talking about is used. I could say the same thing about Ammybelle's arguments using" underlying assumptions and logical shortcuts" but she's talking about cops (which aren't a race) and the argument is about an organization (BLM) vs an organization (law enforcement). So by what you're saying I'm racist and she's discriminatory/prejudice?
Yeah, that's not actually a solid argument, re. me being prejudiced for wanting cops held accountable for their actions. That's just, you know, me wanting the rule of law to continue, in place, strong and managing society.
Exactly. My point in saying that was that it's ridiculous to say you're prejudice/discriminatory as well as saying I'm racist by using the words they and them when talking about an organization. It would be racist if I was saying they/them referring to a race of people as if the race was separate from others.
Um ... no. No that wasn't the part that was not a solid argument. The part where it's not a solid argument is comparing what you're saying to what I am saying. Even if I was being discriminatory to cops (which I don't think I am since I not advocating any viewpoint that would seem to suggest that), it's not equivalent to being racist: me being discriminatory to an occupation is worlds away from being discriminatory to a race of people. That's why one would be called racism and the other is not. Like, literally, you can't equivocate the two - it's not logical.
The argument you would need, but still wouldn't have, would be if I was being racist to a race of people - say, if I started in on Asian stereotypes or whatever the hell counts as talking points for the GOP on Latinos these days, and I was said to be merely "discriminatory" and not "racist. Then you'd have an argument, but you actually can't compare my critiquing an occupation people choose to be in that needs to be watchdogged, and being casually alright with oppression of an entire people. That's why I said it wasn't solid, sorry if that was unclear.
@doozer1345 I never called you racist but I can tell you why your comments (and anyone else who uses All Lives Matter) offended me, making me feel less than.
All Lives Matter is used because when some see Black Lives Matter they automatically read "white people don't matter." It's sad really, because this one issue isn't about everyone, it's about Black people, and that should be ok. The issue the movement is addressing is the staggering statistics that show that Blacks in America are more likely to be jailed, beaten, or killed during an interaction with police then any other demographic in this country. Not by a little. By a lot. We're also more likely to have police interaction at young ages and receive long term prison sentences. These are FACTS. To deny this or focus on anything other than rectifying this obvious disproportion in our justice system (due to attitudes, beliefs, poor training, and policy) is to place the blame on Black people and say that there is something inherently wrong with us that allows these statistics to be true. Honestly, some of the phrasing you've used in this thread has eluded to your belief that it's Black peoples fault. That's offensive. You think there's something inherently wrong with people who look like me? We set ourselves up to be targets? You honestly believe Black people commit that much more crimes then other racial groups?
Never have I ever meant to offend you. I don't look at BLM and think "Oh, they're saying white lives don't matter." My stance has been in support of law enforcement as a whole (no matter the race of the officer) and that their lives matter as well. I didn't ever say I blame black people (or any other race) for injustices that have happened. I think people are to be blamed for injustices whether it be an officer that shot someone unjustly or a civilian that robbed a store (be either of them whatever race doesn't matter). For me it's not about race. It is about the lives of the officers as well as the people who are unjustly killed or brutalized. A TX ranger was killed 2 days ago (he happened to be black) and it's not getting the airwaves it would if the tables were turned and I think thats unfair. Right now our society is focusing on race and officers. My argument was that I thought it was unfair to group most LE as racist and crooked and that mentality has made it harder for LE families (no matter the race of the officer/families). I've never meant to word anything in this thread to allude the fault falls on a specific race. I'm very sorry I came off that way.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Do you really want to know or do you want to get defensive about it?
Because if the former, I think it's more helpful to go back and do it as an exercise in self-analysis. Look at every time the argument is structured around attributing specific, negative characteristics or behaviors to "they/them." Consider what characteristics are being attributed and who "they/them" is meant to represent. Further consider what underlying assumptions and logical shortcuts are being taken to reach particular conclusions in the argument, and what attitudes those assumptions might reflect.
I'm actually not defensive at all. As I said I am curious. I used "they/them" referring to the group BLM as a whole. We are talking about a group of people. Typically in the english language when referring to a group (in general) using they/them to refer to the group you're talking about is used. I could say the same thing about Ammybelle's arguments using" underlying assumptions and logical shortcuts" but she's talking about cops (which aren't a race) and the argument is about an organization (BLM) vs an organization (law enforcement). So by what you're saying I'm racist and she's discriminatory/prejudice?
Yeah, that's not actually a solid argument, re. me being prejudiced for wanting cops held accountable for their actions. That's just, you know, me wanting the rule of law to continue, in place, strong and managing society.
Exactly. My point in saying that was that it's ridiculous to say you're prejudice/discriminatory as well as saying I'm racist by using the words they and them when talking about an organization. It would be racist if I was saying they/them referring to a race of people as if the race was separate from others.
Um ... no. No that wasn't the part that was not a solid argument. The part where it's not a solid argument is comparing what you're saying to what I am saying. Even if I was being discriminatory to cops (which I don't think I am since I not advocating any viewpoint that would seem to suggest that), it's not equivalent to being racist: me being discriminatory to an occupation is worlds away from being discriminatory to a race of people. That's why one would be called racism and the other is not. Like, literally, you can't equivocate the two - it's not logical.
The argument you would need, but still wouldn't have, would be if I was being racist to a race of people - say, if I started in on Asian stereotypes or whatever the hell counts as talking points for the GOP on Latinos these days, and I was said to be merely "discriminatory" and not "racist. Then you'd have an argument, but you actually can't compare my critiquing an occupation people choose to be in that needs to be watchdogged, and being casually alright with oppression of an entire people. That's why I said it wasn't solid, sorry if that was unclear.
Ok...You're not getting it. That's fine. All I was saying is by me using they/them and being racist for saying that is as accurate as saying you're predjudice/discriminatory. It's not accurate is what I'm saying. That's all.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
The thing about racism in 2016 is that it's rarely as blatant as someone straight-up saying "black people are criminals!" It's coded. It's tucked just under the surface, where there's a layer of plausible deniability but it can still influence attitudes, inform policy, and shape who gets the benefit of the doubt in certain situations and who doesn't. If you really want to get at it, then you have to be willing to think hard and honestly about the full context and content of your own attitudes.
It's not a game of gotcha, and it's not about trying to pin someone down for a conviction of "you, there, you're a racist!" It's internal. Either you want to think about this stuff for your own sake or you don't.
I'm not trying to come off as holier than thou, although I realize I probably am anyway. But do you remember when you called me out for being classist way back when? It stung, but you were right to do it, because I was being classist and I wasn't thinking about how easily I was letting my unconscious default assumptions govern what I said. It was only when you told me that I was being kind of an ass by blithely assuming that oh yes, of course everybody drops $200 on silly underpants, why not? that I got it.
I could have tried to deny it ("oh no! I'm not classist! I never said it was bad if you couldn't do xyz!") but that would have been pretty disingenuous, because the fact is, I was absolutely being an ass. It's easy to be blind to your own privilege (I should know, I do it all the damn time). But when somebody who doesn't have that privilege points it out, well, maybe it's worth listening to what they have to say.
But @doozer1345 don't you see it?? By saying you're on the side of law inforcement without consideration of what the details are when a Black life is lost is exactly the point of BLM. You're more concerned with the well being and emotional support of the officer then of the life lost. Most often a Black life. BEFORE figuring out the facts your assumption is that the Black person is at fault. Even when the statistics show that these killings are happening at a disproportional rate. The consideration that we have a systematic problem is secondary based on what you've said here. No one in BLM is saying officers lives don't matter. Their saying officers lives are not worth more then the people they serve. And those being served should not be dying at the rate that they are. Individual people should be accountable for their wrong doing but right now that's not happening. Only one side is ever to blame.
I heard this really great story that might help. A group of 20 people go to a diner to eat. Everyone orders and the food starts coming out. Everyone is served except for John. John waits for a while before asking the sever about his food. He's brushed off. He waits a little longer. John's getting extremely hungry and starts complaining. The other 19 guest get annoyed with John and tell him to stop complaining, be quiet. Now the 19 are getting dessert. Their happy laughing and John's still waiting to be served. He complains and asks for his food again. He yells "John deserves to eat." To which the other 19 yell back "Everyone deserves to eat John." It's true. Everyone does deserve to eat. But saying that does nothing to help John who's hungry. John who hasn't been served. Oh! And by the way. Everyone gets a check for their mea at the end of the night. Even John.
The thing about racism in 2016 is that it's rarely as blatant as someone straight-up saying "black people are criminals!" It's coded. It's tucked just under the surface, where there's a layer of plausible deniability but it can still influence attitudes, inform policy, and shape who gets the benefit of the doubt in certain situations and who doesn't. If you really want to get at it, then you have to be willing to think hard and honestly about the full context and content of your own attitudes.
It's not a game of gotcha, and it's not about trying to pin someone down for a conviction of "you, there, you're a racist!" It's internal. Either you want to think about this stuff for your own sake or you don't.
I'm not trying to come off as holier than thou, although I realize I probably am anyway. But do you remember when you called me out for being classist way back when? It stung, but you were right to do it, because I was being classist and I wasn't thinking about how easily I was letting my unconscious default assumptions govern what I said. It was only when you told me that I was being kind of an ass by blithely assuming that oh yes, of course everybody drops $200 on silly underpants, why not? that I got it.
I could have tried to deny it ("oh no! I'm not classist! I never said it was bad if you couldn't do xyz!") but that would have been pretty disingenuous, because the fact is, I was absolutely being an ass. It's easy to be blind to your own privilege (I should know, I do it all the damn time). But when somebody who doesn't have that privilege points it out, well, maybe it's worth listening to what they have to say.
You used the example that by me using they/them I was being racist. When avid said I was racist she didn't use an example and then took it back saying I was uneducated instead. I said I was curious as to how I was making racist statements and I've yet to understand how I am coming off as racist. As you said you understood when I called you out for being a "classist" and agreed you were. All I'm saying is I don't understand by the example you gave how I am being racist. Who is the somebody who "doesn't have that privilege?" If you're referring to Charla she said I offended her in my wording but I don't recall her calling me racist.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Do you really want to know or do you want to get defensive about it?
Because if the former, I think it's more helpful to go back and do it as an exercise in self-analysis. Look at every time the argument is structured around attributing specific, negative characteristics or behaviors to "they/them." Consider what characteristics are being attributed and who "they/them" is meant to represent. Further consider what underlying assumptions and logical shortcuts are being taken to reach particular conclusions in the argument, and what attitudes those assumptions might reflect.
I'm actually not defensive at all. As I said I am curious. I used "they/them" referring to the group BLM as a whole. We are talking about a group of people. Typically in the english language when referring to a group (in general) using they/them to refer to the group you're talking about is used. I could say the same thing about Ammybelle's arguments using" underlying assumptions and logical shortcuts" but she's talking about cops (which aren't a race) and the argument is about an organization (BLM) vs an organization (law enforcement). So by what you're saying I'm racist and she's discriminatory/prejudice?
Yeah, that's not actually a solid argument, re. me being prejudiced for wanting cops held accountable for their actions. That's just, you know, me wanting the rule of law to continue, in place, strong and managing society.
Exactly. My point in saying that was that it's ridiculous to say you're prejudice/discriminatory as well as saying I'm racist by using the words they and them when talking about an organization. It would be racist if I was saying they/them referring to a race of people as if the race was separate from others.
Um ... no. No that wasn't the part that was not a solid argument. The part where it's not a solid argument is comparing what you're saying to what I am saying. Even if I was being discriminatory to cops (which I don't think I am since I not advocating any viewpoint that would seem to suggest that), it's not equivalent to being racist: me being discriminatory to an occupation is worlds away from being discriminatory to a race of people. That's why one would be called racism and the other is not. Like, literally, you can't equivocate the two - it's not logical.
The argument you would need, but still wouldn't have, would be if I was being racist to a race of people - say, if I started in on Asian stereotypes or whatever the hell counts as talking points for the GOP on Latinos these days, and I was said to be merely "discriminatory" and not "racist. Then you'd have an argument, but you actually can't compare my critiquing an occupation people choose to be in that needs to be watchdogged, and being casually alright with oppression of an entire people. That's why I said it wasn't solid, sorry if that was unclear.
Ok...You're not getting it. That's fine. All I was saying is by me using they/them and being racist for saying that is as accurate as saying you're predjudice/discriminatory. It's not accurate is what I'm saying. That's all.
No ... I got what you were trying to do. I was saying that's not logical, and so it's not a sound argument. I.e if you want to say "if I am x when i say x-thing but she's only y when she says y-thing then that's illogical!" ... make sure that y and that x actually match up. Here they don't, and so it comes out sounding "By me saying Bananas is as accurate as you saying Cupcakes!" - sure we're in the realm of food ... but otherwise, the two don't actually match up to make a point.
The thing about racism in 2016 is that it's rarely as blatant as someone straight-up saying "black people are criminals!" It's coded. It's tucked just under the surface, where there's a layer of plausible deniability but it can still influence attitudes, inform policy, and shape who gets the benefit of the doubt in certain situations and who doesn't. If you really want to get at it, then you have to be willing to think hard and honestly about the full context and content of your own attitudes.
It's not a game of gotcha, and it's not about trying to pin someone down for a conviction of "you, there, you're a racist!" It's internal. Either you want to think about this stuff for your own sake or you don't.
I'm not trying to come off as holier than thou, although I realize I probably am anyway. But do you remember when you called me out for being classist way back when? It stung, but you were right to do it, because I was being classist and I wasn't thinking about how easily I was letting my unconscious default assumptions govern what I said. It was only when you told me that I was being kind of an ass by blithely assuming that oh yes, of course everybody drops $200 on silly underpants, why not? that I got it.
I could have tried to deny it ("oh no! I'm not classist! I never said it was bad if you couldn't do xyz!") but that would have been pretty disingenuous, because the fact is, I was absolutely being an ass. It's easy to be blind to your own privilege (I should know, I do it all the damn time). But when somebody who doesn't have that privilege points it out, well, maybe it's worth listening to what they have to say.
You used the example that by me using they/them I was being racist. When avid said I was racist she didn't use an example and then took it back saying I was uneducated instead. I said I was curious as to how I was making racist statements and I've yet to understand how I am coming off as racist. As you said you understood when I called you out for being a "classist" and agreed you were. All I'm saying is I don't understand by the example you gave how I am being racist. Who is the somebody who "doesn't have that privilege?" If you're referring to Charla she said I offended her in my wording but I don't recall her calling me racist.
In my opinion, minimising the BLM movement by declaring that there shouldn't be BLM, because all lives matter is racist. This is because you are minimising the issues that a minority group are facing and declaring that their issues aren't important. By doing this you don't allow them a voice, and minimise their concerns. To me, that is a form or racism.
For the record, the media has a lot to play in this with the way they report things. I remember after hurricane Katrina there were two news reports on a news station within minutes of eachother. The first one showed blacks "looting" in the aftermath. The second showed whites "gathering supplies". Exact same situation and vastly different interpretations. My point on this is when the only information someone gets is from media without looking more indepth, then they are going to get a very skewed view on the situation. For example the articles you cited, and your experience of what you heard on the radio.
Angel baby June 2013, DD born 22 April 2014, BFP 10 Sept 2015 - Due 22 May 2016
I truly don't think you mean to be offensive @doozer1345but your POV denies the statistical evidence that Blacks are targeted and treated unjustly by too much of LE. That mindset perpetuates and leaves room for racist policy and practices. This is how systematic racism continues to exist, through things like All Lives Matter. It systematically shuts down the voice of the minority group and says shut up. Be quiet. Stop making things about you even though you're the one hurting. All Lives Matter is seeking to oppress the voices of the victim. The racial minority. That is racist.
But @doozer1345 don't you see it?? By saying you're on the side of law inforcement without consideration of what the details are when a Black life is lost is exactly the point of BLM. You're more concerned with the well being and emotional support of the officer then of the life lost. Most often a Black life. BEFORE figuring out the facts your assumption is that the Black person is at fault. Even when the statistics show that these killings are happening at a disproportional rate. The consideration that we have a systematic problem is secondary based on what you've said here. No one in BLM is saying officers lives don't matter. Their saying officers lives are not worth more then the people they serve. And those being served should not be dying at the rate that they are. Individual people should be accountable for their wrong doing but right now that's not happening. Only one side is ever to blame.
I heard this really great story that might help. A group of 20 people go to a diner to eat. Everyone orders and the food starts coming out. Everyone is served except for John. John waits for a while before asking the sever about his food. He's brushed off. He waits a little longer. John's getting extremely hungry and starts complaining. The other 19 guest get annoyed with John and tell him to stop complaining, be quiet. Now the 19 are getting dessert. Their happy laughing and John's still waiting to be served. He complains and asks for his food again. He yells "John deserves to eat." To which the other 19 yell back "Everyone deserves to eat John." It's true. Everyone does deserve to eat. But saying that does nothing to help John who's hungry. John who hasn't been served. Oh! And by the way. Everyone gets a check for their mea at the end of the night. Even John.
I could say the same thing (regarding the bold I highlighted) and it has nothing to do with race. It's support of an organization (and only support for the non-corrupt part of that organization). Again, I never said black people are at fault anywhere in any of my statements. When an organization gets on a radio and says to kill an officer in the name of the organization does send the message to those who are listening that officers lives don't matter. I agree that officers lives are no more important than civilians and I haven't stated otherwise. My statements are in support of LE but not ever did I say they're more important than a civilian. I just don't support an organization that sends out the message to kill or hurt which is what BLM has sent out for the most part where I live. Doesn't mean I would counter and support LE that were acting unjustly and brutally either.
I had a lady call me on 911 one night. She was frantic and yelling at me. She repeated 5x that she was a black woman and on a busy road. She saw my officers on a traffic stop where they had another black woman on the side of the road in a very bad spot. She said it was ridiculous that they decided to put the woman's life in danger by first pulling her over where they did and second by making her get out of the car and stand on the side of the road. She went on for about 10 min. When she paused and asked me what I was going to do about it I then was able to explain to her that the officers were changing the womans tire. They had not pulled her over on a traffic stop and had made her get out of the car and stand away from the car and the road just in case another car came and hit her car while they were changing her tire. She paused for a long time and then said well black lives matter. Then hung up on me. It's an unfortunate reality that woman lives in to assume the worst. I don't know what that's like and I hate that for her. It's not right. If the organization gave her that voice that's great but when the organization calls for destruction (especially against lives of a specific group meaning LE) which is what I've mostly seen and heard I am not supportive of it. That goes for not supporting LE when they're in the wrong.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
I truly don't think you mean to be offensive @doozer1345but your POV denies the statistical evidence that Blacks are targeted and treated unjustly by too much of LE. That mindset perpetuates and leaves room for racist policy and practices. This is how systematic racism continues to exist, through things like All Lives Matter. It systematically shuts down the voice of the minority group and says shut up. Be quiet. Stop making things about you even though you're the one hurting. All Lives Matter is seeking to oppress the voices of the victim. The racial minority. That is racist.
I ask this with complete respect and only curiosity: why isn't the organization recognizing black officer lives? Maybe the organization is somewhere other than where I live but I haven't seen it. Wouldn't it make a black officer feel as though his life isn't as important? Again, I ask this with all due respect and pure curiosity.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
The thing about racism in 2016 is that it's rarely as blatant as someone straight-up saying "black people are criminals!" It's coded. It's tucked just under the surface, where there's a layer of plausible deniability but it can still influence attitudes, inform policy, and shape who gets the benefit of the doubt in certain situations and who doesn't. If you really want to get at it, then you have to be willing to think hard and honestly about the full context and content of your own attitudes.
It's not a game of gotcha, and it's not about trying to pin someone down for a conviction of "you, there, you're a racist!" It's internal. Either you want to think about this stuff for your own sake or you don't.
I'm not trying to come off as holier than thou, although I realize I probably am anyway. But do you remember when you called me out for being classist way back when? It stung, but you were right to do it, because I was being classist and I wasn't thinking about how easily I was letting my unconscious default assumptions govern what I said. It was only when you told me that I was being kind of an ass by blithely assuming that oh yes, of course everybody drops $200 on silly underpants, why not? that I got it.
I could have tried to deny it ("oh no! I'm not classist! I never said it was bad if you couldn't do xyz!") but that would have been pretty disingenuous, because the fact is, I was absolutely being an ass. It's easy to be blind to your own privilege (I should know, I do it all the damn time). But when somebody who doesn't have that privilege points it out, well, maybe it's worth listening to what they have to say.
You used the example that by me using they/them I was being racist. When avid said I was racist she didn't use an example and then took it back saying I was uneducated instead. I said I was curious as to how I was making racist statements and I've yet to understand how I am coming off as racist. As you said you understood when I called you out for being a "classist" and agreed you were. All I'm saying is I don't understand by the example you gave how I am being racist. Who is the somebody who "doesn't have that privilege?" If you're referring to Charla she said I offended her in my wording but I don't recall her calling me racist.
In my opinion, minimising the BLM movement by declaring that there shouldn't be BLM, because all lives matter is racist. This is because you are minimising the issues that a minority group are facing and declaring that their issues aren't important. By doing this you don't allow them a voice, and minimise their concerns. To me, that is a form or racism.
For the record, the media has a lot to play in this with the way they report things. I remember after hurricane Katrina there were two news reports on a news station within minutes of eachother. The first one showed blacks "looting" in the aftermath. The second showed whites "gathering supplies". Exact same situation and vastly different interpretations. My point on this is when the only information someone gets is from media without looking more indepth, then they are going to get a very skewed view on the situation. For example the articles you cited, and your experience of what you heard on the radio.
I don't just get it from the radio and articles. I work in LE as well and see/hear it firsthand. I never said there shouldn't be a BLM. I said I didn't support what their call to actions were when it came to looting, violence, etc. We live in a country that supports all kinds of organizations. To say one shouldn't exist bc I don't particularly support it isn't a part of my belief system. I didn't say any groups issues weren't important either.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
@doozer1345 I get what you're asking. Similarly people ask "what about black on black crime." What BLM seeks to spotlight is the overwhelming number of Black lives being lost at the hands of law enforcement. It is not saying that Black lives are not unjustly lost in other situations (officers being killed by criminals, civilians being killed by criminals, criminals killing criminals). But it is saying that there's a difference. There's a difference when you're being killed, threatened, beaten, dehumanized by the people you pay to protect you. Cops should be held to a higher expectation then any and all of the criminal murders mentioned above.
But @doozer1345 don't you see it?? By saying you're on the side of law inforcement without consideration of what the details are when a Black life is lost is exactly the point of BLM. You're more concerned with the well being and emotional support of the officer then of the life lost. Most often a Black life. BEFORE figuring out the facts your assumption is that the Black person is at fault. Even when the statistics show that these killings are happening at a disproportional rate. The consideration that we have a systematic problem is secondary based on what you've said here. No one in BLM is saying officers lives don't matter. Their saying officers lives are not worth more then the people they serve. And those being served should not be dying at the rate that they are. Individual people should be accountable for their wrong doing but right now that's not happening. Only one side is ever to blame.
I heard this really great story that might help. A group of 20 people go to a diner to eat. Everyone orders and the food starts coming out. Everyone is served except for John. John waits for a while before asking the sever about his food. He's brushed off. He waits a little longer. John's getting extremely hungry and starts complaining. The other 19 guest get annoyed with John and tell him to stop complaining, be quiet. Now the 19 are getting dessert. Their happy laughing and John's still waiting to be served. He complains and asks for his food again. He yells "John deserves to eat." To which the other 19 yell back "Everyone deserves to eat John." It's true. Everyone does deserve to eat. But saying that does nothing to help John who's hungry. John who hasn't been served. Oh! And by the way. Everyone gets a check for their mea at the end of the night. Even John.
I could say the same thing (regarding the bold I highlighted) and it has nothing to do with race. It's support of an organization (and only support for the non-corrupt part of that organization). Again, I never said black people are at fault anywhere in any of my statements. When an organization gets on a radio and says to kill an officer in the name of the organization does send the message to those who are listening that officers lives don't matter. I agree that officers lives are no more important than civilians and I haven't stated otherwise. My statements are in support of LE but not ever did I say they're more important than a civilian. I just don't support an organization that sends out the message to kill or hurt which is what BLM has sent out for the most part where I live. Doesn't mean I would counter and support LE that were acting unjustly and brutally either.
I had a lady call me on 911 one night. She was frantic and yelling at me. She repeated 5x that she was a black woman and on a busy road. She saw my officers on a traffic stop where they had another black woman on the side of the road in a very bad spot. She said it was ridiculous that they decided to put the woman's life in danger by first pulling her over where they did and second by making her get out of the car and stand on the side of the road. She went on for about 10 min. When she paused and asked me what I was going to do about it I then was able to explain to her that the officers were changing the womans tire. They had not pulled her over on a traffic stop and had made her get out of the car and stand away from the car and the road just in case another car came and hit her car while they were changing her tire. She paused for a long time and then said well black lives matter. Then hung up on me. It's an unfortunate reality that woman lives in to assume the worst. I don't know what that's like and I hate that for her. It's not right. If the organization gave her that voice that's great but when the organization calls for destruction (especially against lives of a specific group meaning LE) which is what I've mostly seen and heard I am not supportive of it. That goes for not supporting LE when they're in the wrong.
So you acknowledge that a for a group of people, their reality is that LE being helpful is so outside their norm they resort to calling 911, yet you don't understand BLM as a movement?
You actually stated earlier that the shootings that started this were justified. The problem is that those shootings weren't the start at all. This has been building for decades. Think about the LA riots in the 90s. the fact that almost 30 years later black people are still being beaten by police with generally less provocation than a white person is WHY the BLM movement started.
Angel baby June 2013, DD born 22 April 2014, BFP 10 Sept 2015 - Due 22 May 2016
@avidkeoI used a specific shooting. I didn't say all. The recent shootings started the organization. That's not saying the shootings and brutality wasn't happening beforehand. I don't understand BLM as a movement bc of what I've seen/heard firsthand. What Charla has explained on here isn't the organization that is in my area under the same name that I've seen firsthand.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
@avidkeoI used a specific shooting. I didn't say all. The recent shootings started the organization. That's not saying the shootings and brutality wasn't happening beforehand. I don't understand BLM as a movement bc of what I've seen/heard firsthand. What Charla has explained on here isn't the organization that is in my area under the same name that I've seen firsthand.
FWIW - even if it were true that these recent shootings were justified, which ... I mean, no - this statement you're making where you ignore history and such, is like saying "the invasion of Poland started the second world war" - though technically it is trrue, it is only technically true - the wealth of history and context matter, sometimes more than the tipping point, and to not acknowledge that is to miss out on a huge chunk of understanding.
@AmmyBellewhere have I ignored history? Again, I cited a specific recent shooting. I didn't reference and dissect all of the recent (or past shootings/brutalities).
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
@AmmyBellewhere have I ignored history? Again, I cited a specific recent shooting. I didn't reference and dissect all of the recent (or past shootings/brutalities).
By saying your opinion is based only on this thing or that (recent shootings) and then being informed, actually no - there's a lot of history here, just come and look! and then going on to say "Well, I'm basing my opinion on this thing that happened!" ... is ignoring history.
Love the discussion - there was a really good study done by the ivy leagues a few years ago that looked at how being black or having a traditional black name (emphasis on traditional) resulted in being pulled over more often, more convictions, shown less houses when shopping, and not brought in for interviews, even the other variables were controlled.
It was really eye opening as a Caucasian to be confronted with facts regarding privileges I didn't even realized I was given.
In regards to the looting, etc. I hate it when a select few individuals ruin the true reason of the movement, including in Baltimore when the majority of people were protecting their homes and businesses and cleaning up afterwards.
I saw this cartoon and thought it summed up nicely the all lives vs BLM movement.
THIS. I get that the conversation has kind of moved on from this, but this is something that is really important for me to stress. As a Baltimore native, it pains me that people use the looting/dangerous rioting/criminal activity that occurred in our city to further bring down the BLM movement. The people who committed those acts were taking advantage of a bad situation, and it was such a small amount of people in comparison to the peaceful protesters. Yes, it was awful, and it looked really bad. But those are not the true supporters of BLM, they are criminals. And the large majority of people in the city, black and white, were completely appalled by their actions and not associated with it or supportive of it in any way. There were BLM protesters sincerely BEGGING on the streets and on the news for these people to stop.
@AmmyBellewhere have I ignored history? Again, I cited a specific recent shooting. I didn't reference and dissect all of the recent (or past shootings/brutalities).
By saying your opinion is based only on this thing or that (recent shootings) and then being informed, actually no - there's a lot of history here, just come and look! and then going on to say "Well, I'm basing my opinion on this thing that happened!" ... is ignoring history.
No. I'm just not opening another can of worms but stating my opinion on each and every one of the known shootings that have happened. I'm basing my opinion off of firsthand experience, articles, news, stats, etc.
Been married since 2009. Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter) Several MCs DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
I don't think anyone is trying to deny the existence of systematic racism. It clearly exists. I think the issue comes down to the methods of protest that some use in the name of BLM being not only damaging to their message, but damaging to those who are truly racist as well as those who are truly trying to help/protect&serve (which seems to be what @doozer1345's experience in TN has been). Eta: Really, everyone needs to be combating racism, microaggressions, and stereotyping together so that the only damage/radical change done is to elements or individuals that have been keeping racism in place. The movement absolutely needs to exist, but it's sad when certain individuals or certain areas of the movement lose focus of fighting for fairness and unity against racism, and instead display violence. I'm sure the media hypes this up because they have a track record of doing just that, which makes this issue even more complicated.
I'll say that the movement in pgh has been largely positive from what I've seen. It was also much needed based on unjust assaults and at least one instance I personally know of of wrongful death in custody which bately made the news (it was the father of one of my students). There have been community outreach groups that work in communities and schools to unify LE with the communities they serve and to educate middle school and high school students on their rights and responsibilities, as well as addressing laws and how to peacefully abide. They have given people space to talk about frightening encounters, and have been retraining some officers too from what I've read. It has also helped to address the privilege that most white people enjoy in the area that the only adolescent talk they have to have is about sex and drugs rather than sex, drugs, and police safety. I've had students who have been unjustly assaulted in the past because they "looked suspicious" (they were scared) and put their hands in their pockets to get a soda out, or something similarly innocuous. Absolutely, police need to be able to keep themselves safe too (a few years back we had a few policemen killed in quick succession which was awful), but there needs to be balance. Some cities seem to be making positive step forward and others are still going in circles it seems.
Take this test! (Select the one on race--it only takes a few minutes, but I don't think you can do it on mobile).
It's an Implicit Bias Assessment Test (IAT), a Harvard-based sociology study, and it will tell you to what extent you are biased against Black people and toward white people. This is how racism works now, such that we have racism without racists: people who consciously know that they shouldn't be racist and would never say anything explicitly racist, but who have all sorts of racially based presumptions that cause them to act differently (for example, to pull the trigger more quickly).
As the work of researchers like Phillip Atiba Goff (UCLA) has shown, this sort of implicit bias is pervasive, even among Black people: because Blackness is so deeply associated with worthlessness in our culture, even Black people have implicit biases against Black people. Implicit bias, rather than overt conscious racism, is why we have Racism is Real (video).
If you refuse to acknowledge and act against systemic racism (advocating #alllivesmatter, for example), that is the most destructively racist thing you can do. Worse, even, than calling someone the n-word. Because it's covert and insidious and perpetuates broad societal injustice.
tbh I think the answer to the question "are you racist?" should just be "are you a person in society today? okay then, yes."
We all are. Accept it, recognize it, strive to do better. Don't try to exonerate yourself. Just accept that it is, that it's in the air, and that we all need to work collectively to curb the pollution so that each generation can have it a little better than the last.
tbh I think the answer to the question "are you racist?" should just be "are you a person in society today? okay then, yes."
We all are. Accept it, recognize it, strive to do better. Don't try to exonerate yourself. Just accept that it is, that it's in the air, and that we all need to work collectively to curb the pollution so that each generation can have it a little better than the last.
Absolutely! But you (i.e. everyone) should still take the test:)
I make all my students take the IAT when we talk about race, and never once has a student ever had anything less than a slight bias toward white people. And this includes Black students. It's illuminating for us all to see just how far we have to go. With irrefutable proof that our subconscious minds do not necessarily agree with our conscious ones.
They also have IATs on weight, gender, sexuality, religion, etc.
Re: UO Thursday 4/14
The argument you would need, but still wouldn't have, would be if I was being racist to a race of people - say, if I started in on Asian stereotypes or whatever the hell counts as talking points for the GOP on Latinos these days, and I was said to be merely "discriminatory" and not "racist. Then you'd have an argument, but you actually can't compare my critiquing an occupation people choose to be in that needs to be watchdogged, and being casually alright with oppression of an entire people. That's why I said it wasn't solid, sorry if that was unclear.
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
It's not a game of gotcha, and it's not about trying to pin someone down for a conviction of "you, there, you're a racist!" It's internal. Either you want to think about this stuff for your own sake or you don't.
I'm not trying to come off as holier than thou, although I realize I probably am anyway. But do you remember when you called me out for being classist way back when? It stung, but you were right to do it, because I was being classist and I wasn't thinking about how easily I was letting my unconscious default assumptions govern what I said. It was only when you told me that I was being kind of an ass by blithely assuming that oh yes, of course everybody drops $200 on silly underpants, why not? that I got it.
I could have tried to deny it ("oh no! I'm not classist! I never said it was bad if you couldn't do xyz!") but that would have been pretty disingenuous, because the fact is, I was absolutely being an ass. It's easy to be blind to your own privilege (I should know, I do it all the damn time). But when somebody who doesn't have that privilege points it out, well, maybe it's worth listening to what they have to say.
No one in BLM is saying officers lives don't matter. Their saying officers lives are not worth more then the people they serve. And those being served should not be dying at the rate that they are.
Individual people should be accountable for their wrong doing but right now that's not happening. Only one side is ever to blame.
I heard this really great story that might help. A group of 20 people go to a diner to eat. Everyone orders and the food starts coming out. Everyone is served except for John. John waits for a while before asking the sever about his food. He's brushed off. He waits a little longer. John's getting extremely hungry and starts complaining. The other 19 guest get annoyed with John and tell him to stop complaining, be quiet. Now the 19 are getting dessert. Their happy laughing and John's still waiting to be served. He complains and asks for his food again. He yells "John deserves to eat." To which the other 19 yell back "Everyone deserves to eat John."
It's true. Everyone does deserve to eat. But saying that does nothing to help John who's hungry. John who hasn't been served.
Oh! And by the way. Everyone gets a check for their mea at the end of the night. Even John.
DD: 05/14/16
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
For the record, the media has a lot to play in this with the way they report things. I remember after hurricane Katrina there were two news reports on a news station within minutes of eachother. The first one showed blacks "looting" in the aftermath. The second showed whites "gathering supplies". Exact same situation and vastly different interpretations. My point on this is when the only information someone gets is from media without looking more indepth, then they are going to get a very skewed view on the situation. For example the articles you cited, and your experience of what you heard on the radio.
DD: 05/14/16
I had a lady call me on 911 one night. She was frantic and yelling at me. She repeated 5x that she was a black woman and on a busy road. She saw my officers on a traffic stop where they had another black woman on the side of the road in a very bad spot. She said it was ridiculous that they decided to put the woman's life in danger by first pulling her over where they did and second by making her get out of the car and stand on the side of the road. She went on for about 10 min. When she paused and asked me what I was going to do about it I then was able to explain to her that the officers were changing the womans tire. They had not pulled her over on a traffic stop and had made her get out of the car and stand away from the car and the road just in case another car came and hit her car while they were changing her tire. She paused for a long time and then said well black lives matter. Then hung up on me. It's an unfortunate reality that woman lives in to assume the worst. I don't know what that's like and I hate that for her. It's not right. If the organization gave her that voice that's great but when the organization calls for destruction (especially against lives of a specific group meaning LE) which is what I've mostly seen and heard I am not supportive of it. That goes for not supporting LE when they're in the wrong.
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
What BLM seeks to spotlight is the overwhelming number of Black lives being lost at the hands of law enforcement. It is not saying that Black lives are not unjustly lost in other situations (officers being killed by criminals, civilians being killed by criminals, criminals killing criminals). But it is saying that there's a difference. There's a difference when you're being killed, threatened, beaten, dehumanized by the people you pay to protect you. Cops should be held to a higher expectation then any and all of the criminal murders mentioned above.
DD: 05/14/16
You actually stated earlier that the shootings that started this were justified. The problem is that those shootings weren't the start at all. This has been building for decades. Think about the LA riots in the 90s. the fact that almost 30 years later black people are still being beaten by police with generally less provocation than a white person is WHY the BLM movement started.
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
Been married since 2009.
Unicornuate Uterus (yes I menstruate glitter)
Several MCs
DD born 2013 (our miracle "you can't have babies" baby!)
I'll say that the movement in pgh has been largely positive from what I've seen. It was also much needed based on unjust assaults and at least one instance I personally know of of wrongful death in custody which bately made the news (it was the father of one of my students). There have been community outreach groups that work in communities and schools to unify LE with the communities they serve and to educate middle school and high school students on their rights and responsibilities, as well as addressing laws and how to peacefully abide. They have given people space to talk about frightening encounters, and have been retraining some officers too from what I've read. It has also helped to address the privilege that most white people enjoy in the area that the only adolescent talk they have to have is about sex and drugs rather than sex, drugs, and police safety. I've had students who have been unjustly assaulted in the past because they "looked suspicious" (they were scared) and put their hands in their pockets to get a soda out, or something similarly innocuous. Absolutely, police need to be able to keep themselves safe too (a few years back we had a few policemen killed in quick succession which was awful), but there needs to be balance. Some cities seem to be making positive step forward and others are still going in circles it seems.
Take this test! (Select the one on race--it only takes a few minutes, but I don't think you can do it on mobile).
It's an Implicit Bias Assessment Test (IAT), a Harvard-based sociology study, and it will tell you to what extent you are biased against Black people and toward white people. This is how racism works now, such that we have racism without racists: people who consciously know that they shouldn't be racist and would never say anything explicitly racist, but who have all sorts of racially based presumptions that cause them to act differently (for example, to pull the trigger more quickly).
As the work of researchers like Phillip Atiba Goff (UCLA) has shown, this sort of implicit bias is pervasive, even among Black people: because Blackness is so deeply associated with worthlessness in our culture, even Black people have implicit biases against Black people. Implicit bias, rather than overt conscious racism, is why we have Racism is Real (video).
If you refuse to acknowledge and act against systemic racism (advocating #alllivesmatter, for example), that is the most destructively racist thing you can do. Worse, even, than calling someone the n-word. Because it's covert and insidious and perpetuates broad societal injustice.
We all are. Accept it, recognize it, strive to do better. Don't try to exonerate yourself. Just accept that it is, that it's in the air, and that we all need to work collectively to curb the pollution so that each generation can have it a little better than the last.
I make all my students take the IAT when we talk about race, and never once has a student ever had anything less than a slight bias toward white people. And this includes Black students. It's illuminating for us all to see just how far we have to go. With irrefutable proof that our subconscious minds do not necessarily agree with our conscious ones.
They also have IATs on weight, gender, sexuality, religion, etc.
DD: 05/14/16
ETA: I realize that sounds horribly crass given the above discussion. Not my intention. But, Avenue Q