There are some circumstances, regardless of culture, in which a human being is more likely to engage in risky behavior, including unprotected sex. Some of these circumstances might be things like feelings of hopelessness, feelings of a lack of safety, reactions to trauma, disrupted family life, and much more.
Due to a combination of larger policies and practices (past and present), including institutional discrimination and much more, black children are more likely to face these circumstances than white children, on average.
If you disagree, please try and be very specific – which of the above assertions do you disagree with?
So you can promote the grouping of individuals and still be an individualist? Racialists promote the grouping of people by races. Individualists do not.
LOL… apparently individualists like you are quite happy to “promote the grouping of individuals” into gropus like “racialists” and individualists. I’ve also frequently heard you “promote the gropuing of individuals” into groups like “statists”, socialists, and many more groups.
Seriously. This is gibberish. Recognizing that social categorizations exist is a reasonable thing to do, and a reasonable thing to take into account when considering public policy.
Well the distinctions are easy to make in those cases. For example, a racialist groups people into races, while an individualist does not. A statist favors a state. A socialist wants the state to commandeer private property.
I am still not clear on who is white and who is black to the racialists. Can you help me?
So then you’ve answered your own questions – according to WillFarnaby, you can indeed promote the grouping of individuals and still be an individualist.
You’re the one who created this weird grouping “racialists”, so presumably you’ve come up with some worldbuilding and backstory for them. I’m not good at filling in details for fantasy groupings of people, so I don’t think I can help you here.
How about this? Take a good hard look at those that are the real problem here, the racists, and see who they attack as “black” and who they support as “white”, then take the group of people that are trying to fight those that are racists and try to convince us that the latter group of people are the real problem. The labeling was already done by the racists, as much as you would like for us to ignore that fact.
That’s a very complicated question, and entire books have been written on the topic. I pointed you towards a decent starting point earlier in the thread;
They don’t know either from what I’ve heard. The white nationalists/alt-right types can’t give a good answer either. Though most people considered racist are not actually advocating for race-based legislation.
The question of how to precisely define race is very difficult, but the question of whether racism exists is not. We liberals are interested in reversing the effects of racism, not promoting the well-being of people with certain DNA.
They can’t? They racists I’ve seen throughout my life didn’t seem to hesitate one whit when it came to pointing out those they hated.
They don’t? This says differently. Or is the only race-based legislation you consider to be the problem is that legislation that opposes past and current racism?
Let’s say you were at a jobsite and two guys were working on the other side, one black, one white.
Another guy comes up to you and give you a tool and says “Hey can you run this over to Mike over there.”
“Which one is Mike?”
“The black guy.”
Are you really saying you’d still be unable to figure out who the guy was talking about? That you’d say something like “Black guy? What’s a black guy?”