Re: Part 2

Very much appreciate the homework....  Thanks...

There are a few problems and this cuts across all races.  

One problem is media pollution. The prevailing image of the Black man under 40 is negative. Guys under arrest on the news, "street toughs" in movies, lower middle class guys who witnessed one drug deal in their lives portraying themselves as "rock slingers" in videos and interviews, making it rain in strip clubs, and bragging about their drug-dealing past for street cred.

Another problem is minorities aren't allowed to be individuals. If a White guy is an asshole, it's "he's an asshole." If a Black guy is an asshole, it's "those Blacks." If one 25 year old Black guy robs a provider, that turns into "I don't see Black guys under 40." Because all (fill in the blank minorities) are the same, one (fill in the blank minority) screwed me over, thus I don't deal with the (fill in the blank minority).  

Again, this cuts across all races when it comes to minorities, even within one's own group. Internal racism is real and it's powerful.

Another problem is exposure. If enough of the young Black guys a provider knows (possibly from her neighborhood) are misogynistic, violent, and criminal-minded, you might end up seeing a young Black provider saying "I won't see Black men under 35." (And if you're not a young Black provider, but all you know of young Black men is what you see in the media... see problem one.)

The truth is, of course, not all young Black men are like this. And disrespectful, criminal behavior isn't the exclusive province of young Black men. Reading some of the hostility on review boards is enough to tell you that. Let alone real-world evidence.

As I've said before in this forum, a "no disrespectful men" warning might be as meaningless as a "no LE" warning, but at least it leaves the door open for the young Black attorney, the young Black doctor, the young Black IT guy with deep pockets and no ill intent to come in.

One motive that has been overlooked is that the phrase "no black men.." adds a level of exclusiveness to the providers goods, a,  "I'm a $80 whore but at least I don't do niggers" or "BBC hasn't gapped my ass" sort of appeal.

And I’m back on the soapbox. I would have replied sooner, but I was watching “Jane the Virgin.”

Before we get to the facts, let’s take on your assertions. I don’t know how you got your 88% figure, but it seems to be implying that 88% of criminals are Black. If the pool of criminals is 100 people and eliminating Black men as criminals reduces the risk of encountering a criminal by 88%, then the idea must be that 88% of the people in the criminal pool are Black.  

Let me introduce you to the famous but obviously not famous enough FBI Table 43. Criminals and arrests broken down by race. There are twice as many White criminals in America as Black.  

(Don’t click this: it would probably be better to copy and paste this than to link to it directly from TER. Just sayin’.)

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-43

You can check the table for years that pre-date Eric Holder and they all say the same thing: most of the criminals in America are White. Roughly 68 to 70%. So, by your logic, it would make more sense to have a no White guys policy, right?

Because when you say “criminal,” the numbers say you’re probably talking about a White person. A 70% chance in fact. So, ladies, your new policy should be “No White men.

The Ferguson Effect

Let’s throw in some more facts that show there are waaaay more White criminals in America than Black and that providers are more in danger from White guys than Black guys. Some of it will be anecdotal.

There are more White guys hobbying than Black. Some of that’s cultural, some of that’s economics. Even Black providers say they see more White guys than Black. There’s a discussion on interracial interactions on the GD board where a few sisters say it and the sisters I’ve seen, where the subject has come up, tell me they see more White guys than Black guys.

So the chances of a lady seeing a Black criminal would go down by a some percentage points while the chance of her seeing a White criminal would go up by a some percentage points just by the fact that the clientele in this world skews more White than the general population.

I’ll give you something less anecdotal that will skew the numbers even more. Black neighborhoods are more heavily policed than White neighborhoods, so the numbers in FBI Table 43 will show more Black arrests than they would otherwise. Kind of hard to find a White criminal if you’re not even looking for one. Or to put it another way, if the security guard is following the Black shopper with cash in his hands, the White shoplifter is free to rob the store blind.

I’ll connect that to the real world so you can better see what I’m saying. Ferguson, Missouri. The DOJ just completed a review of Ferguson’s police practices. Let’s look at one thing they found (among other things). Ferguson police were twice as likely to stop and search Black drivers as Whites. Guess what else, though? They found 26% more contraband on the White people they stopped than they found on the Black people.

To give you a clearer picture of what this means, picture this. If they stopped and searched 200 Black people and 100 White people, they found 26% MORE contraband on the 100 White people, HALF the sample size of Blacks, as they found on the Black people. I’ll say it again. They found 26% more contraband on half as many people. I'll beat the horse some more: this 100 people had contraband on them as often as a group TWICE their size PLUS 26% more. So this group of 100 is more criminal minded than the larger group of 200 right? There should be more of a focus on them, don’t you think?

Did this change their policing practices? Did this change their view that 88% of Black people are criminals? Or did they continue to stop and search twice as many Black people as they did White people? You know what the answer is.  

Because racism and reality are mutually exclusive terms. Nothing has the power to erase facts like racism. If a bunch of racists read FBI Table 43 tonight, I’d bet you half of them will have erased every single number from their mind by Friday night. The other half will hang their hat on “disproportionate” and mumble “Uh, told you so?”

The numbers on White criminals and Black criminals would show even more White criminality if police didn’t make the Giuliani-esque assupmption that Black people are committing all the crimes and devoted some of their fervor to non-Black neighborhoods. So providers have a much greater chance of seeing a White rapist and/or a White thief than they do a Black one. So “No White men,” ladies. “No White men.”


-- Modified on 3/9/2015 11:34:31 PM