If arguments were won by making your opponent go “what the fuck is he talking about?” you would be the champ.
Or a plant. One person firing up the crowd would make a whole world of difference.
What was obvious was that the white kid wasn’t using the same script as the black kid. The black one was justifying what he was doing, saying it was there for days as if it was OK to steal it. The white kid was just giving vague answers. It seemed clear what was up.
As to the woman, she was being so friendly and silly I would have simply assumed she was joking about the stealing. A real thief wouldn’t be so cavalier. I’m sure this just makes me a sexist.
Plus, of course, she was hot. So if she really needed a bike she could just cart her cute ass down to the local strip club or hooters and earn enough money to pay for a bike in an hour. I’m sure this just makes me a sexist.
I don’t know. I’d need more info. Where was this filmed?
In my neighborhood, yes, it would surprise me. But in the deep south? I don’t know. In a neighborhood like Zimmerman’s that is mixed race but recently had a lot of thefts that were mostly young black males? Then, no.
It was obvious that all the passers by were white. Again, it seems clear that the producers were looking for exactly what they got.
They weren’t. Some were definitely black, and others may have belong to other groups.
The show is usually filmed, if not always, in the NYC tri-state vicinity. A lot is done in Westchester.
OK. I wasn’t paying close attention to everyone’s race. But I didn’t notice any nonwhites on my one view of the video.
I’d like to see the same test done right. Get a real lowlife that’s white. That has no education, shifty eyes, baggy clothes and speaks with an inner city accent. Think Eminem from Eight Mile, but not famous. Have him try to take the bike.
The white kid from that video looked like he just walked off the set of a Cheerios commercial.
The problem I have with the experiment is that with the white kid, they show quite a few people over time giving the kid a pass. With the black kid, once someone confronts him, others are in the area and join in. I’d like to see a more apples to apples comparison. But I would fully expect that the white kid would get more of a pass than the black kid. Though the neighborhood and dialing the scruffiness up and down probably would be bigger determinants than color alone. That’s my guess.
This show is almost interesting. But what they do is come up with a thesis and craft situations to support it. And editing is very helpful in that regard. I’m waiting for someone to kick Quijones in the cajones for manipulating them.
This is part of the problem. Speaking with a certain accent and in a certain dialect (and it really is a dialect- it’s not like it’s a choice!) should not mean one is treated more negatively, but it does. I think you’re partially wrong, though- you seem to be implying that skin color had nothing to do with this, but clothing and dialect did. I think all three had something to do with this. But even if you’re right, that doesn’t excuse anyone- treating someone differently (and with more suspicion) based on baggy clothing or dialect is just as wrong as treating someone differently based on skin color.
Plus as you mention, he’s kind of vague-ish, non-confrontational with his replies, whereas the black kid is snotty and the lady is jokesy cutesy (and hot, take an ancient hideous old granny type like me, bet I’d be in cuffs in a heartbeat! :D). It was not an “apples to apples” comparison
Simple solution–the “thieves” all dress alike (I vote for tight cutoff jeans and a soaked white t-shirt, but only because I find that wardrobe to be least threatening), and none of them speak. When addressed, they simply look up and smile and get on with their work.
How he’s dressed doesn’t have much to do with the fact that he said the bike wasn’t his, and that he was stealing it. I’d like to hear from the people who passed on getting involved and find out what was going through their heads–it’s pretty obvious what was going through peoples’ heads in the other two instances. With the black kid, they were catching or punishing a bad guy. With the hot girl, they were hoping they could get laid. I’m wondering what their motivation was for letting the white kid steal the bike?
That maybe he’d fix them up with his hot sister.
The white kid was from their ‘group’ so they had no problem with letting him go about his business. All the above posts have their merit, but honestly you would have to be blind or willfully ignorant to not see the reason as being that simple.
But he wasn’t just from their group–as stated above, some of the passers-by were black. Are we supposed to think that all people who go to that park think it’s okay for white kids to steal bikes, or that they’re all just excessively dim and couldn’t possibly figure out that that was what he was doing?
Or that since it was a white guy they didn’t feel the need to react immediately or in a confrontational manner.
.
It’s also not as simple as “black kid= bad, hot girl=good, white kid=maybe bad/maybe good” either. The way they were talking, the way they were dressed, other cues did make a difference to the passersby (of different races FWIW), as would it to those of us that are saying so. How a person presents themselves DOES matter, and does have a bearing on how people perceive them.
For example a bratty little half-thuggy dressed tween (as the young black kid appeared to be) got more of an interaction from the parent-acting people within the group of onlookers. A “what do you think you’re doing young man” reaction if you will.
I’d be interested to see what would happen if the kid had been big and full-on thugged out. (white or black). I’ll betcha dollars to donuts not very many people would be confronting him directly if that were the case.
Let me see…a fake video showing…real? stuff??
My thoughts exactly.
Oh, bullshit. Clothing is a choice. Dialect is a choice, as well. You can’t choose your skin color. His shirt and hat make him look like he’s from the ghetto. They steal bikes in the ghetto. If the black kid had tucked in his shirt and put his cap backward completely, instead of cocked to the side and barely on, he wouldn’t have gotten much flak.
There isn’t anything wrong with judging people’s behaviors based on visual clues to their behaviors. His clothing was and is a legitimate hint toward his intentions. Completely different than skin color.
OK, I partially retract the clothing bit (it’s reasonable that some clothing, though, IMO, not hoodies or just baggy clothes and a sideways hat, can reasonably be interpreted in negative ways), though I think in the case of the video, the kid’s clothing was not any more threatening than the white kid.
But you’re wrong about dialect, in general- some people have the ability to switch dialects at will, but most don’t. Most people can only speak fluently in the dialect they grew up in. I can communicate with any English speaker, of course, but I can’t speak any London dialects, or any New Zealand dialects, even if I wanted to. A Brooklyn kid who’s spent most of his time in Brooklyn schools is probably not going to speak naturally in anything but a Brooklyn dialect. It’s not reasonable to judge someone based on their dialect. African-American Vernacular is a real dialect of English, with real differences (and real native speakers who don’t speak naturally any other dialect of English), and it’s not reasonable to judge someone simply because they speak in this dialect.
Maybe, but beyond that, stripping and pole-dancing is harder than it looks. It’s not an effortless career choice, even for the terminally hawt.