Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

09/02/2014 10:03:56 AM · #3

... and then during the Martin case, one must remember that for the longest time the image shown of him was of a young, frail looking young man, the bearer of candy and a poor defenceless person set upon by what some referred to as a crazed wanna be cop.

Perception in some instances is what one makes of it... nothing more.

Sadly, in both cases, the victim is dead and as such we have to rely on the version of the witnesses and there are different versions of what transpired.

I for one will wait until all the evidence is presented and will abide by the decision made by the jurors.

escapetooz

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

09/02/2014 02:18:01 AM · #4

There are so many different conversations happening at once here it's hard to keep up. In any case my two cents:

Robbery, provocation, details aside, the benefit of the doubt, when in doubt, is swayed by race.

The bottom line is they were unarmed teenagers. If they were white, the conversation would be completely different. It wouldn't be "one less thug off the street" (yes, I've seen multiple people comment that way where anonymity lets the racism fly) and much more a story of a teenager that lost his way and died in a tragic way.

The point is... EVEN IF it was mostly the teens fault, if they had been white there would be a lot more empathy and a lot less "he deserved it" talk.

This article is the best one I've seen illustrating this idea, to the extreme:

When the media treats white killers better than black victims

From the article:
"This is by no means standard media protocol, but it happens frequently, deliberately or not. News reports often headline claims from police or other officials that appear unsympathetic or dismissive of black victims. Other times, the headlines seem to suggest that black victims are to blame for their own deaths, engaging in what critics sometimes allege is a form of character assassination. When contrasted with media portrayal of white suspects and accused murderers, the differences are more striking. News outlets often choose to run headlines that exhibit an air of disbelief at an alleged white killer's supposed actions. Sometimes, they appear to go out of their way to boost the suspect's character, carrying quotes from relatives or acquaintances that often paint even alleged murderers in a positive light."

RayEthier

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

08/29/2014 08:06:11 AM · #5

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Cory:
Look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism.

It's RACISM for the Navajo Nation, after more than a century of broken promises and institutional neglect by the Federal Government, to seize whatever opportunities they can to provide employment for their own people on reservation lands?

And that is the argument that is most commonly made. I'm just fairly skeptical that we can get rid of racism when we live in a world where there are laws based on race. And interesting conundrum don't you think?

OK... how about if the job requirement specified that one had to have the ability to communicate in Navajo... would you still consider that a racist ploy or would that more accurately fall into the category of "Job requirement"?

Ray

RayEthier

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

08/29/2014 08:02:31 AM · #6

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Cory:
Look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism.

It's RACISM for the Navajo Nation, after more than a century of broken promises and institutional neglect by the Federal Government, to seize whatever opportunities they can to provide employment for their own people on reservation lands?

My feelings exactly my friend.

I have had the opportunity and priviledge of working on many a reservation and unlike most others welcomed the day that they initiated the Tribal Police.

Who best understands and can liaise with the people of an environment than their own kind.

Added to that was the fact that many individuals (whites) had a preconceived idea of what natives were liked and carried a boatload of prejudicial views about the very community they were sent to serve.

Sad that.

Ray

ray_mefarso

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 50mm f1.2L

08/29/2014 05:53:02 AM · #7

Originally posted by Cory:

but what should happen? Let's say there is a law 300 years ago that says that Native Americans are subhuman and any white man can take their land. Is it enough to say 200 years later when the white people have all the land that the law was unjust and it will now be repealed and there will no longer be a law that allows people to take other people's land based on their skin colour. Of course it's not fair - the white people have all the land and the Native Americans are starving on dusty reservations. It's not racist to say that Native Americans should, say, be given an area of land for their own. They were robbed and now they are getting redress. It was a racist law and the new law is anti-racist or repair-racist.

ray_mefarso

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 50mm f1.2L

08/29/2014 05:46:52 AM · #8

Originally posted by Cory:

This is a tired line for me - I\'m sorry, but damnit, you\'ve gotta own it man, you\'ve gotta take responsibility man. I mean, really, I had a childhood that arguably should have doomed me to prison, failure, etc. I made a choice when I was 25 to rise above all of that and to change my life.. I see many parallels between how I felt then and what you\'ve written here - I felt my situation was the product of other people\'s actions and choices, which to a degree, I was right. However, in the end, I had to choose what I wanted for myself, and I think much the same is true of this situation. Of course there are those who ARE doing this, the problem is really the enablers and apologists who perpetuate the exact same explanation that you\'ve just given me.

I get it\'s a tired line for you and others, but how can you possibly know what the effect of years of slavery and racism are? There is no parallel in history that I can think of - a race of people transported across the world and subjugated, brutalized, raped, tortured and murdered over a time span approaching 400 years. And then, after gaining liberty, existed in a grossly unfair, biased and prejudiced society. If you said to me that similar happened to, say, the Norwegians and look how they\'ve recovered without any scars or ill-effects I would say you have a point. The closest thing we have is perhaps the treatment of Jews in the last century, and everything about the Jewish experience and attitude today is coloured by the experience of the holocaust, yet you say that black people should effectively \'get over it\'.

Your own experience cannot, with all due respect, be compared to the black experience in the US. You belong to the most priveleged class there is - white and male. I would further make this point - the vast majority of black people are not criminals. They have jobs (even though the job market has been historically skewed against them) they pay taxes (even though paying their tax dollars does not afford them equal treatment under the law) they are in the military and fight and die for the US (even though historically they had to fight in segregated units because white people didn\'t want to be near them) they work incredibly hard to further their prospects through education (even when 60 years ago they had to defeat police brutality and institutional aparthied to gain access to that education).

So, if you and I agree that a lot of people (black and white) can try and succeed in getting themselves out of a life of crime and violence then doesn\'t it also follow that the people who start further at the back are going to have a higher level of failures?

The enablers and apologists are also the people who have fought the hardest to make change. Because you recognise a problem doesn\'t mean you give into it.

I truly apologize if what I say is offensive to you, as that is not at all my intent here, but while I cannot deny that all you\'ve said is true, I also cannot accept what you\'ve said as an acceptable state of affairs, nor as a reason for this to continue into the future. Surely you can agree with that? (I hope?)

No apology necessary, I\'m not at all offended. I think you say what you know and what you see. The state of affairs is indeed not acceptable but I have optimism that people can always improve the human condition and deal with others fairly and justly. It took hundreds of years, the actions of intelligent, determined people, the huge resources of one of the most powerful countries there have ever been to subjugate another race, so it will take time and effort to undo, but that\'s not to say it can\'t or won\'t be done.

Not really. I actually end up wondering why the Irish didn\'t end up more like the blacks. Aside from that, I\'m left wondering why people feel that historical wrongs against their ancestors is acceptable as a justification for their mistreatment of others in the present. Frankly, I\'ve suffered VERY little aggression from darker individuals, mostly I find my interactions with black folks to be downright pleasant and enjoyable. Statistics are still valid though, even in the face of my personal experience. And for what it\'s worth, I\'m one of three white people that I know of in my neighborhood. There really are more black families on my block than white.

The Irish were able to keep their language, religion, community, freedom of travel, homeland, freedom to marry, earn wages (however small) etc etc. The Irish experience is not comparable with the slavery experience. The statistics you allude to can\'t be viewed in isolation, others include higher rate of black incarceration for a first offence compared to white; longer sentences for similar offences compared to white; more custodial sentences for similar offences compared to white; more blacks on death row for similar offences committed by whites; less tax dollars spent on education in black communities than white; less tax dollars spent on health care in black communities compared to white; lower levels of education held by whites doing similar jobs to blacks. etc etc

Well, I don\'t quite know what more I could do here, it\'s not like I actually avoid black people in any way, of course, I\'m not the sort that really worries about trouble too much either, being that I\'m comfortable in sketchy situations. It\'s nothing that I\'ve experienced personally for the most part (small things, mostly easily diffused and non-issues), it\'s much more a simple observation that there clearly is more going on here than many would like to admit. In the end, I wonder how much your response to this changes knowing that I don\'t live in a white suburb, and that I don\'t actually fear black people, but do instead simply keep my eyes open just a bit wider when around unknown black people, on the dual basis that there is an increased statistical likelihood of violence, and the knowledge that white folks aren\'t the only racists out there.

The critical thing here is that you keep your eyes a bit wider open around black people - that\'s fair enough. I do too, around certain places and people, but is \'black\' here just a shorthand for maybe poor, maybe resentful, maybe disadvantaged, maybe angry? What do you mean by \'more going on here than many would admit\'? Do you think that black people are predisposed towards crime and violence? Do you think they are inherently lazier than white people? Less intelligent? less trustworthy? Or do you think that for the most part the actions and attitudes of black people are a product of their environments and experiences?

I would agree that many black people could and should do more, could and should try harder. I despair that the black community is not more united. That they don\'t use their financial power to force change (a la the Jews) That they are so easily bought out and sold out (I can\'t deny that african slaves were sold by their own, that informants destroyed the radical black consciousness movement in the 60s) but unless you\'ve lived it you can\'t really point a finger.

Throwing your lot in with all of the immigrants in England is probably a pretty horrible idea, given that the Muslim variety have been recently seen to bomb subways, stab people in the street in broad daylight, and are actively forcefully implementing sharia law in parts of Britain. They are in fact quite troublesome and pushy, and are causing a hell of a lot of trouble. Again, not ALL of them by any means, it\'s clearly a small minority, but that small minority is only denounced as lip-service by the majority of their fellow-minded immigrants. It has shit nothing to do with the foodstuffs, and they are actually stopping British citizens and demanding that they pour out their alcohol on the street, which is a far cry from consuming cheap beer in the street (something the Brits mostly approve of in fact...)... The Bulgarians? No idea about them, haven\'t heard a word of the controversy. As for the islanders like you, man, don\'t you know I live part-time in Miami, you Jamaicans are a hoot, haven\'t met one I didn\'t like yet.

Radical Islam is a global problem and, actually, in London it\'s a much much smaller problem than news reports would have people believe. I know many muslims but no jihadists (as far as I know!) I don\'t have the answers there but I would maintain that knowing somebody, knowing and respecting their culture is going to lessen the chances they will do you harm.

In the end Ray, if you\'re ever in the US drop me a line, it\'d be my honest pleasure to buy you a beer or three and have a chat. I think you\'d be surprised at how many stereotypes you\'ve got wrong about me. ;)

Cory, I would be happy to have a beer with you and would insist on buying you the first one! I hope I haven\'t stereotyped you, I\'m learning about you all the time. I much prefer a person to say the difficult thing honestly than pay lip service to the correct line. Look at that - we\'ve cured racism right there!

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

08/29/2014 02:18:13 AM · #9

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

And that is the argument that is most commonly made. I'm just fairly skeptical that we can get rid of racism when we live in a world where there are laws based on race. And interesting conundrum don't you think?

heavyj

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4

Panasonic Lumix 20mm f1.7 ASPH

08/29/2014 01:18:34 AM · #10

Originally posted by posthumous:

I sat through the whole long video that heavyj posted. He took Zimmerman's testimony as fact and was extremely vague about the physical evidence and witness statements that supported it. Then he goes off on a long rant about *spanking* of all things.

Finally, he says we have to unite and fight the real power, like the fascist weapons of the police, but then when Michael Brown is killed by a policeman, he lumps it together with the Trayvon Martin case.

He also calls the president "B. Hussein Obama."

Not my idea of a rational philosopher.

Did we watch the same video? From what I gathered, he took both physical and witness statements into account that corroborated what Zimmerman said.

As far as the spanking goes, just from my own experience, teaching young kids in Japan, kids who get spanked or are punished for misbehaving are FAR more likely to show their peers and elders more respect as they grow up. It use to be Japanese father's that did the disciplining but that's slowly transitioned into the mothers job. In the years since, some mothers have had a tougher time doing it. I have kids talking back to their mothers like they were their house slaves, and the mothers' bowing down to them. The I have kids who, once out of line, they know it's game over. And now, after almost 15 years of teaching, I've seen them grow up. While none of them have become BAD people, the ones who are less likely to listen, more likely to not care about the rules etc are the ones who grew up without discipline.

Now, those are my experiences here in Japan, and also from growing up in a house where the rules were set by the parents. I think this does play an important role in how we grow up. I'm not saying that kids who aren't properly disciplined will grow up to be thugs, and kids who were properly disciplined will be wonderful people, but there is a correlation to a certain degree wouldn't you say.

And calling the president by his name, although not how others would call him, doesn't quite mean much unless you're intent is to associated him with something negative by doing so. People who call me by my last name rather than my first, just because that's how they call their friends is fine with me. However, if it's to be mean by associating me with the golden arches in some way to cause me harm (Kids did this in elementary school) that's different.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

08/29/2014 12:36:40 AM · #11

Originally posted by Cory:

Look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism.

It's RACISM for the Navajo Nation, after more than a century of broken promises and institutional neglect by the Federal Government, to seize whatever opportunities they can to provide employment for their own people on reservation lands?

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

08/29/2014 12:07:38 AM · #12

Originally posted by karmat:

So, where does Dillon Taylor fit into this discussion?

AND did you know who he was without googling his name?

AND, if you didn't know who he was, why did you not know?

Glad you posted it. I considered it earlier, but figured I'd be better off not posting that one.

FWIW, this is not unusual. Hell, look up Navajo Preference Hiring - blatant racism. Only two of a thousand examples of this, but apparently it's ok?

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

08/29/2014 12:04:34 AM · #13

Originally posted by BrennanOB:

Before you watch the videos, guess which guy with a gun was white and which guy was black.

Powell ("the black guy") was carrying a knife, not a gun...

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

08/28/2014 11:57:35 PM · #14

So, where does Dillon Taylor fit into this discussion?

AND did you know who he was without googling his name?

AND, if you didn't know who he was, why did you not know?

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

08/28/2014 11:43:17 PM · #15

Two video of guys carrying guns (but not pointing them at anyone), acting irrationally and failing to comply with police officer's lawful orders.

One guy has an assault rifle and the police spend a quarter hour talking with him before arresting him. He was not charged and his rifle was returned to him the next day. Video

One guy has a pistol and the time between the police opening the doors of their cruiser and firing ten shots into him (3 shots into his prone body) was 20 seconds. Video

Before you watch the videos, guess which guy with a gun was white and which guy was black.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

08/28/2014 11:39:39 PM · #16

Originally posted by Mike:

We're saying the same thing: it's one thing to say "I see a different color skin than mine!" and another thing altogether to judge a person based not on their words or actions but on the color of their skin.

08/28/2014 09:37:35 PM · #17

Originally posted by Mike:

hey i'm divorced... watch it.. :)

marriage is not a precursor to fatherhood. commitment goes both way.

point is the children need a father and mother that care about them and their well-being and uprising.

Ha! I was typing my reply and didn't see this before... But... I stand by my post. :D

08/28/2014 09:34:52 PM · #18

I'm not talking about divorce... (although that's not the best thing either, I know personally)... I'm talking about children whose parents were never married... and they lived "day to day"... the children worrying every day if Daddy would come home that night or not...

Or if... a new guy would move in that day...

"fatherhood doesn't require marriage, it requires understanding that you created a life you are responsible for raising."

Sending a check is not enough, even though the law says it is. You're right... they must fulfill the commitment of RAISING the child.

But... we're off topic here... we're supposed to be talking about prejudice... not responsibility. :D

Now that I'm here though... I think I'm much more "on alert" with a young black male... or young white male... than I am with either a young black or white female.

We HAVE been taught... through our experiences... what is a threat to us... and what is not.

Call it racism... call it sexism... call it... uhh... ageism... (I'm not on alert with a 75 year old man... any color... as I am with a 20 year old man... any color)...

Call it what you like. My experiences have honed my instincts... True or not... It's all I have to go by.

I've been raped... I've been mugged.

I'm on alert when any characteristic of a person triggers my "radar" because of my experiences.

Mike

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

08/28/2014 09:33:40 PM · #19

Originally posted by Lydia:

What does that teach the children about commitment if the man is not willing to legally say that he is responsible for them?

How many children see a new "daddy" every other month?

08/28/2014 09:25:34 PM · #20

What does that teach the children about commitment if the man is not willing to legally say that he is responsible for them?

How many children see a new "daddy" every other month?

Mike

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

08/28/2014 09:06:34 PM · #21

fatherhood doesn't require marriage, it requires understanding that you created a life you are responsible for raising.

Message edited by author 2014-08-28 21:06:47.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

08/28/2014 08:05:17 PM · #22

What causes lack of fatherhood is when people like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie get married (as they recently have) because their CHILDREN wanted them to, and asked them to, get married.

And these are... our heroes.

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

08/28/2014 08:03:47 PM · #23

Originally posted by ray_mefarso:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Mike:
Race is just one, not the only, of many factor I apply to judging someone not knowing them personally.

Not singling you out personally (definitely not, this is a pervasive thing) but THAT is exactly what has to change across the board. Race ought not be a factor at all when it comes to "judging" people.

the institutions of racism have been so effective at destroying the humanity of black people (especially men) and removing the capability to fight back and respond to injustice by any legitimate means that large parts of the community (largely ignored by the white community at large) turn on themselves in a self destructive rage. Also, since the 1960s (the time of civil rights) onwards the machinery of state has sought to subvert and destroy any attempt by black people to organise and engage aggressively with the oppressor, and that machinery (local, state, FBI etc.) have been very effective

This is a tired line for me - I'm sorry, but damnit, you've gotta own it man, you've gotta take responsibility man. I mean, really, I had a childhood that arguably should have doomed me to prison, failure, etc. I made a choice when I was 25 to rise above all of that and to change my life.. I see many parallels between how I felt then and what you've written here - I felt my situation was the product of other people's actions and choices, which to a degree, I was right. However, in the end, I had to choose what I wanted for myself, and I think much the same is true of this situation. Of course there are those who ARE doing this, the problem is really the enablers and apologists who perpetuate the exact same explanation that you've just given me.

I truly apologize if what I say is offensive to you, as that is not at all my intent here, but while I cannot deny that all you've said is true, I also cannot accept what you've said as an acceptable state of affairs, nor as a reason for this to continue into the future. Surely you can agree with that? (I hope?)

Originally posted by Cory:

Again, I'm not saying that this is in any way the full picture, but it's certainly on my mind when I'm in a predominately black area, especially considering that I'm quite pale and the simple reality is that black folks seem to be at least as racist (if not more so) than white people.

Originally posted by ray_mefarso:

I'm sure it can seem that way. But don't you, on a quick reading of the history of black people in the US, wonder that they are not more violent towards you than they are? Also, I think I would be very much happier to be a white person asking for help at a random door in a black neighbourhood than a black person in a white neighbourhood (excluding the worst ghettos of any colour)

Not really. I actually end up wondering why the Irish didn't end up more like the blacks. Aside from that, I'm left wondering why people feel that historical wrongs against their ancestors is acceptable as a justification for their mistreatment of others in the present. Frankly, I've suffered VERY little aggression from darker individuals, mostly I find my interactions with black folks to be downright pleasant and enjoyable. Statistics are still valid though, even in the face of my personal experience. And for what it's worth, I'm one of three white people that I know of in my neighborhood. There really are more black families on my block than white.

Originally posted by Cory:

*shrug* Just my thoughts and observations, but at some point I have to wonder if judging others based on statistical evidence is actually racism, or even if it's wrong. We cannot, in today's world where we contact so many people each day, actually judge each person on their individual merits and personality, if only because there isn't enough time to be able to do so. This leaves us in a position where we have to make a choice, either follow the guidance that can be gleaned from stereotypes and statistics, or ignore that and treat everyone equally. I'm not sure that either approach isn't without merit, and I'm pretty certain that both have their downsides as well. So, what's a fellow to do?

Originally posted by ray_mefarso:

A fellow should everyday educate and challenge himself. Learn something about the culture that you fear/dislike and try and change your thinking on it. It won't necessarily make you safer but you might make some small act of bravery or selfless kindness today that will help to change the status quo in the future. You can be a butterfly's wing, starting a hurricane of change!

Well, I don't quite know what more I could do here, it's not like I actually avoid black people in any way, of course, I'm not the sort that really worries about trouble too much either, being that I'm comfortable in sketchy situations. It's nothing that I've experienced personally for the most part (small things, mostly easily diffused and non-issues), it's much more a simple observation that there clearly is more going on here than many would like to admit. In the end, I wonder how much your response to this changes knowing that I don't live in a white suburb, and that I don't actually fear black people, but do instead simply keep my eyes open just a bit wider when around unknown black people, on the dual basis that there is an increased statistical likelihood of violence, and the knowledge that white folks aren't the only racists out there.

Originally posted by Cory:

I'm genuinely curious as to your thoughts on the matter Ray, as I suspect your perspective on this is quite different from my own. Robert, you too. I'd like to hear how you feel this should be handled, given that "Race ought not be a factor at all when it comes to "judging" people." - I realize I'm not taking the party line here, but I see a pretty big gap in the 'ignore race no matter what' argument.

Originally posted by ray_mefarso:

There are people, recent immigrants to the UK, that the media and certain politicians are trying to teach the population to hate. They are economic migrants from eastern Europe. It is easy to spot, stereotype and dislike them. They're like all foreigners - dirty, shifty, prone to laziness and theft. They have shops selling unknowable foodstuffs and drink cheap beer in the street. I play football (soccer to you) and have made the effort to know these Bulgarians and invite them to play in our local league. And guess what? They're like us - the other less recent immigrants to the UK, me from Jamaica. Find what you have in common with somebody and race fades into the background. I guess it is more difficult in the US because of it's history but just make a new black friend - that will at least be one person who won't shoot at you. Get to know his family and you're on a roll!

Throwing your lot in with all of the immigrants in England is probably a pretty horrible idea, given that the Muslim variety have been recently seen to bomb subways, stab people in the street in broad daylight, and are actively forcefully implementing sharia law in parts of Britain. They are in fact quite troublesome and pushy, and are causing a hell of a lot of trouble. Again, not ALL of them by any means, it's clearly a small minority, but that small minority is only denounced as lip-service by the majority of their fellow-minded immigrants. It has shit nothing to do with the foodstuffs, and they are actually stopping British citizens and demanding that they pour out their alcohol on the street, which is a far cry from consuming cheap beer in the street (something the Brits mostly approve of in fact...)... The Bulgarians? No idea about them, haven't heard a word of the controversy. As for the islanders like you, man, don't you know I live part-time in Miami, you Jamaicans are a hoot, haven't met one I didn't like yet.

Originally posted by Cory:

I mean really, the whole thing is a huge deal with no clear answer, but I cannot see the wisdom in ignoring information which is available to us upon which we can more successfully judge the potential outcomes of an interaction. I think using all the information we can possibly gather is the best idea, regardless of the popularity of said methodology. Interestingly, I think I'd like to be swayed from this position, as clearly it's not a particularly popular position to hold today.

Originally posted by ray_mefarso:

What a good question and interesting statement: "Interestingly, I think I'd like to be swayed from this position, as clearly it's not a particularly popular position to hold today" I don't know that you should hold a position, whatever it is, because of it's popularity. Surely you should think that fear is a bad way to live - fearful of other humans, the areas they live in, what they might do. You talk about the chances of negative things happening and I'm sure there are risky places that I, as a black man would not be comfortable to visit. I think you just have to have the courage to risk finding out that a stereotype is unfounded if in even one out of ten people. (but keep yourself safe!)

As I said, I'm not fearful, and I agree, total shit way to live man, I'd rather take the risks myself and have all the fun. But I do recognize the reasons why some do fear black people, and I recognize that they may not being doing so for reasons that are rooted in racism. (even if the actual fear itself manifests as such)... The problem is, as you inadvertently noted, the problem folks may only be one in ten people, or maybe even on in a hundred, but if the risk is increased, and the maximum penalty is death, I can absolutely sympathize with those who feel the risk far outweighs the rewards.

--

In the end Ray, if you're ever in the US drop me a line, it'd be my honest pleasure to buy you a beer or three and have a chat. I think you'd be surprised at how many stereotypes you've got wrong about me. ;)

Message edited by author 2014-08-28 21:36:25.

Mike