4 ms·

Every racist has used this same logic to explain why they won't let their kids play with the black neighbors. The problem you're running into is mistaking stat

Every racist has used this same logic to explain why they won't let their kids play with the black neighbors. The problem you're running into is mistaking statistics for personal actions. you can get tetanus from a rusty nail, the solution is more care around rusty nails, not to refuse to work around them. Or disallow your children from working around them. In fact, disallowing that harms them in the long run as they never learn how to work around them with more care. At the end of day being alive implies risk, teaching your children how to manage that risk is a part of your job as a parent.

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
<< Every racist has used this same logic to explain why they won't let their kids play with the black neighbors. I do want to point out that the moment you call everything racist, nothing is racist. Same applies to most labels used to attempt to shut down discussions based on merits/data/statistics rather than emotions and rallying flag keywords. In the old country, my parents did not let me play with other white kids for reasons other than race. Were their intolerance so different, because it did touch the color of the skin? It is not a bait. It is a real question. << At the end of day being alive implies risk, teaching your children how to manage that risk is a part of your job as a parent. We are in agreement. << Or disallow your children from working around them. In fact, disallowing that harms them in the long run as they never learn how to work around them with more care. Depends on the kid temperament really. I was somewhat obedient. My sister was not. You did not really answer the question about intolerance. Is racism tolerable? Should you not "not to refuse to work around them" based on your own argument?
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  > I do want to point out that the moment you call everything racist, nothing is racist. What was actually said is that if your criteria applies to racist actions there's a problem with your criteria, in the same way that if your behavior results in someones death, there's a problem with your behavior. statistically speaking, most murders are perpetrated by black men. So statistically speaking, your garden variety racist is right to distrust their black neighbor. ^ that the above is true speaks clearly to the flaw in your thinking.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    <<"What was actually said is that if your criteria applies to racist actions there's a problem with your criteria" Could you elaborate a little bit? I do not want to put words in your mouth. What is the problem with my criteria? Are the criteria applied inherently racist? Am I racist the moment if I apply them even if they are not inherently racist? <<statistically speaking, most murders are perpetrated by black men. So statistically speaking, your garden variety racist is right to distrust their black neighbor. Well, duh. You don't have to convince me. As any city-dweller will tell you, as you approach a stranger on a sidewalk at night, you run an internal calculus of expected danger. You typically develop sharp senses rather fast as a result^ that the above is true speaks clearly to the flaw in your thinking. . I am thinking Chicago/New York ( but I would assume it applies to any bigger city really ). We can talk about whether it is fair or not, but that is the reality of our current existence. You want to change it, change the proportions and start putting more whities in jail ( I am all for increasing accountability; maybe things will improve in general if the laws are applied across the board ). Alternatively, we can try seeing what can be done to ensure less crimes are committed in urban areas so that whites don't flee to suburbs. <<^ that the above is true speaks clearly to the flaw in your thinking. What is that flaw?
    - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
      You just rationalized being on alert because a black stranger is walking towards you and not because you're in a bad neighborhood with a propensity for violence. And you're still asking what the flaw in your thinking is.
      - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
        Yes, I am asking, because you fail to articulate an argument and avoid answering a single question, while I am being very open and clear. I am starting to think you do not argue in good faith, which is the cornerstone of HN. << and not because you're in a bad neighborhood You just assumed quite a lot about a hypothetical that I purposefully left open-ended. Note that I did not say black or bad neighborhood in it. << And you're still asking what the flaw in your thinking is. What is that flaw ( ideally, please refrain from saying I am evidently racist; it kinda undermines the argument with circular logic )? Note that this is the 2nd time I am asking that very question. If you won't offer something to work with, I will discontinue this conversation.

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago

<< Every racist has used this same logic to explain why they won't let their kids play with the black neighbors. I do want to point out that the moment you call everything racist, nothing is racist. Same applies to most labels used to attempt to shut down discussions based on merits/data/statistics rather than emotions and rallying flag keywords. In the old country, my parents did not let me play with other white kids for reasons other than race. Were their intolerance so different, because it did touch the color of the skin? It is not a bait. It is a real question. << At the end of day being alive implies risk, teaching your children how to manage that risk is a part of your job as a parent. We are in agreement. << Or disallow your children from working around them. In fact, disallowing that harms them in the long run as they never learn how to work around them with more care. Depends on the kid temperament really. I was somewhat obedient. My sister was not. You did not really answer the question about intolerance. Is racism tolerable? Should you not "not to refuse to work around them" based on your own argument?

P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
> I do want to point out that the moment you call everything racist, nothing is racist. What was actually said is that if your criteria applies to racist actions there's a problem with your criteria, in the same way that if your behavior results in someones death, there's a problem with your behavior. statistically speaking, most murders are perpetrated by black men. So statistically speaking, your garden variety racist is right to distrust their black neighbor. ^ that the above is true speaks clearly to the flaw in your thinking.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  <<"What was actually said is that if your criteria applies to racist actions there's a problem with your criteria" Could you elaborate a little bit? I do not want to put words in your mouth. What is the problem with my criteria? Are the criteria applied inherently racist? Am I racist the moment if I apply them even if they are not inherently racist? <<statistically speaking, most murders are perpetrated by black men. So statistically speaking, your garden variety racist is right to distrust their black neighbor. Well, duh. You don't have to convince me. As any city-dweller will tell you, as you approach a stranger on a sidewalk at night, you run an internal calculus of expected danger. You typically develop sharp senses rather fast as a result^ that the above is true speaks clearly to the flaw in your thinking. . I am thinking Chicago/New York ( but I would assume it applies to any bigger city really ). We can talk about whether it is fair or not, but that is the reality of our current existence. You want to change it, change the proportions and start putting more whities in jail ( I am all for increasing accountability; maybe things will improve in general if the laws are applied across the board ). Alternatively, we can try seeing what can be done to ensure less crimes are committed in urban areas so that whites don't flee to suburbs. <<^ that the above is true speaks clearly to the flaw in your thinking. What is that flaw?
  - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
    You just rationalized being on alert because a black stranger is walking towards you and not because you're in a bad neighborhood with a propensity for violence. And you're still asking what the flaw in your thinking is.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
      Yes, I am asking, because you fail to articulate an argument and avoid answering a single question, while I am being very open and clear. I am starting to think you do not argue in good faith, which is the cornerstone of HN. << and not because you're in a bad neighborhood You just assumed quite a lot about a hypothetical that I purposefully left open-ended. Note that I did not say black or bad neighborhood in it. << And you're still asking what the flaw in your thinking is. What is that flaw ( ideally, please refrain from saying I am evidently racist; it kinda undermines the argument with circular logic )? Note that this is the 2nd time I am asking that very question. If you won't offer something to work with, I will discontinue this conversation.