It’s nothing to sneeze at.
It’s nothing to sneeze at.
I am pretty sure you are almost exactly the type of person the OP is complaining about. Your sneer is palpable in any of these discussions I’ve noticed you.
Well, I don’t know why both white and black kids point at the black doll when asked “who’s the bad baby?” But I’m not sure why researchers are pointing at dolls and saying “who’s the bad baby?” in the first place.
I also don’t know why researchers are taking white cops and comparing blacks to apes.
Seems kind of leading and stupid, and, dare I say, racist.
I am also not sure about what do do with “unconscious discrimination” (i.e. implicit bias). I mean, it’s unconscious. You can’t legislate around that in any way that doesn’t come straight out of an Orwellian novel. I can just see people taking implicit bias tests over and over to get “better at it” (which you can do, btw).
Well, I’m glad you’re so self-aware of your privilege. I find myself being routinely ignored by middle managers on a daily basis. 
I’m not sure anyone knows what to do about it. Point is, people of color have explained their experiences, I’ve explained my experience as a white man, and there are studies that show that having white skin (all other things being equal) is beneficial. If your net response to all of these anecdotes and data points is to continue to deny that the phenomenon we’re attempting to describe even exists, well, that’s on you brother.
Judges set sentences. Cops don’t, and prosecutors don’t.
The author of the Vox article said -
The authors of the report said -
“Don’t take this as proof of discrimination” became “this is further proof of discrimination”.
:shrugs: There’s glory for you.
Fathers who don’t live with their children spend less time with their children. Most black fathers don’t live with their children. I’m not sure how to make it clearer than that.
The whole civil rights movement is what’s changed.
You can suspect whatever you like. If you are going to present reports that say “this should not be taken as evidence of discrimination” as proof of discrimination, I for one am going to take your suspicions with several grains of salt.
Sure it does. Former President Obama, Politifact, and I, think the fact that most black children grow up without their father is significant. You think this is less significant because they have other father figures.
Other father figures are more likely to be abusive. So former President Obama, Politifact, and I, think you are wrong.
I don’t believe the lengthening of time they go without their fathers is significant. And you have not demonstrated that it is because of racism.
23.76%.
Seriously - you want me to evaluate the worth of your answer before you give it? Come on.
Regards,
Shodan
I don’t deny it. I find it interesting and actually like talking about it, even if I find it a purely academic exercise that nobody can really do anything about.
That’s bullshit and you know it. I’ve made it clear that:
(1) I love to argue;
(2) I hate when people mischaracterize my stances.
Shodan won’t give me the satisfaction of (1), and you run afoul of (2).
BTW, feel free to disbelieve me since I obviously can’t prove this, but I took one of those implicit bias tests once (where you have a split second to react) and my result was to be slightly biased in favor of black people, not against them as you’d expect for a white guy like me.
Just human to human. Deep breath.
I hold that judges can be influenced by others in the justice system when issuing sentences. That’s reasonable, right? So if there’s bias anywhere in the system, judges might be influenced.
I’m glad that you agree that there’s evidence for racism in the system. That’s good enough for me for now.
Obama and Polotifact don’t dispute my point, which uses other terms.
But if you agree there’s evidence of racism, and you agree that longer sentences would reduce potential father time, then the only disagreement is on how significant this difference is. Which brings us to the last question.
You said it wasn’t significant, which lead me to assume you had a ballpark figure in your mind. If you were just guessing, with no numbers in mind, then your assertion that the actual effect is insignificant is nothing but a wild guess. If that’s the case, then I withdraw the question, since there’s no point in challenging a wild guess for such a potentially significant factor in the lives of children.
So I think that we should fight racism is the justice system, of which evidence exists. And logically, which you don’t disagree with, those longer sentences could affect kids. We just disagree on how significantly, and your estimate is just a guess. I don’t have an estimate either, but I’m happy to leave this discussion here - the only disagreement is on how significant the effects on kids of this evidenced racism is.
Where did I mischaracterize your stances? Cite, please.
“Pretty fly for a white guy!”
- Frank Zappa, the late lamented…
When you cherrypicked one thing I said that could be spun as not caring about racial inequities in the justice system, took advantage of said cherrypicking to characterize my “injustice meter” as broken, and ignored the argument I made to Shodan in the same conversation that innocent black men get railroaded all the time, especially in the Deep South.
If you take back your “real injustice” comment about sentencing disparities, I’ll certainly retract my criticism of your injustice meter. But if you still don’t think sentencing disparities due to racism are “real injustice”, then I truly do think whatever criteria you use to measure injustice is way out of whack.
How was a criticism of specific words that you used mischaracterizing you? I criticized your exact words. That you’ve said other things that match my concept of justice doesn’t mean that you didn’t say this thing that was way off.
Damn, you might want to have some words with your past self then, and don’t forget to cup the balls.
I don’t agree with Ronald Reagan about much, but he was right about this:
“The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally - not a 20 percent traitor.”
Progressives and Tea Partiers both fail to understand this.
A corollary to Godwin’s law should be LAZombie’s law which states that any Internet discussion that isn’t about Black oppression will eventually evolve into a discussion of Black oppression if the primary participants are liberals.
Well, as a “progressive”, I’d disagree with the idea that ‘we’ are, but I have to recognize that there are assholes on the left who demonize the idea of compromise and people not agreeing with them 100%. I just don’t think there are anywhere near as many as there on the right, and that’s not a political belief on my part, it is from listening to people on the right like the Tea Party who won’t even support good ideas if they came from “THE ENEMY”.
Oh, can I have one called Squirrel’s Law? Any discussion of race relations in the US will inevitably draw out a white man crying about how he’s “SO OPPRESSED!”
But please, continue to demonstrate how straight white men have it so hard in the US. Provide cites, because, strangely enough, I’d wager that a majority of the liberals right here that disagree with you are, in fact, straight white men.
One should not miss the current context, indeed those assholes in Charlottesville remain Nazi shitheads. And that is by Word Of God. 