I hate feminazis

Post Reply New Topic

Do you think that a simple blog, that is not peer reviewed and follows no statistical methodology can reasonably be construed as proof of some sort?

Followed by: Everyone's taught to be kind and not racist, but it's a "fact" that black people are biologically more aggressive than whites.

And:
Girls don't need an education, they truly just want to grow up to be housewives.

Well part of the problem is the police are unknown to the community, they are only known as enforcers rather then those keeping people safe. They need to recruit more in the community and if not they also need to engage with them. Like go to community meeting. Hold questions and answers, etc.

What would motivate police officers to integrate with communities that they have no respect for and think are inferior human beings? Racism needs to be eliminated at the level of recruitment and training before genuine community involvement can happen and trust can begin to be built in law enforcement in America again. Training and recruitment programs for police need to be totally overhauled to eliminate LEOs with overt and harmful racial biases, then the involvement in the community and trust-building can become a priority.

maybe if American police forces adopted Peel's Principals?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles

Sounds reasonable, and like it is a philosophy that is already embraced by police in the UK and Canada, which might explain why you hear so much more about racism and the shooting of unarmed people of colour in America than here (Canada) or the UK.

Also, as a sidenote: there is a municipal region (used to be a Peel County, now Peel Region) on the other side of Toronto from where I live named after Sir Robert Peel. It's a small world.

I also think the militarisation of police forces in the US is contributing to the problem of unjustified violence against the citizenry. I think it's a good idea that Obama is trying to get police departments across the country to get rid of all the military equipment they got from the armed forces like tanks and body armour and assault rifles. They are not trained or equipped to de-escalate situations anymore, but quite the opposite--they come into any situation primed and ready for battle (against citizens), which is insane.

1. Yes, black people are evidently more agressive. I displayed FBI statistics that showed that 50% of black people commit the share of the crimes, despite them making up only 13.7% of the population. They also commit more murders than any other race. Please don't let your agenda get in the way of common sense.

2. That's a nice strawman, how long did it take to build? No, but seriously, if we were to hypothetically have an adult discussion (that would involve looking at the facts without bias and constructing logical conclusions, something which few people on this thread actually have the ability to manage), it would appear that throwing out petty, childish comments such as your own wouldn't much constitute to the discussion at hand. But, at the matter at hand, the 77 cents to the dollar that women make to men would suggest less women are working, and bearing in mind the equal rights act, we can conclude that less women are managing to achieve the higher business stature men are. We can safely say that there is a reason for that, namely household responsibilities (unpaid maternity leave is a big factor, for one).


Remember that I'm apparently the childish one here, yet apparently the only one that wants to look at statistics and work out any sensible conclusions from there. However, if anybody does have anything to add to the conversation that would happen to contradict what I am claiming, be my guest. No seriously, I'd love that. Because all I'm getting so far are children in adult bodies crying at me that I'm being controversial.

What is the scientific evidence that black aggression in the US has an innate biological cause and that social factors can be ruled out???

Black MEN in the US(contrary to the feminist argument that women of color are more oppressed than men of color) are vilified and have the highest unemployment of any demographic group. MUCH higher than black women because they are perceived as threatening so they are actively excluded, targeted by the police, and statistically far more likely to be incarcerated and serve much longer sentences for the same crime then white people.

So yes, blacks are more aggressive because guess what, princess? When you treat people unfairly just like you have continued to do so for centuries, it makes them angry. Anger comes from feelings of powerlessness so they become violent and aggressive as a way to show they do have power. I have no doubt that black men who carry the genes for aggression are actively selected for given the kind of environment they grow up in where the competition between other blacks is so extreme that being tough and thuggish is the only way to survive.

1. Societal or biological, it's reasonable to recognise that it does occur, far more commonly. Hypothetically, if it were to be societal, what would be the direct cause of such a thing?

2. This is technically a transgression regarding the equality act. If black people were being excluded for being black, they would have the right to sue. So why don't they?

3. I don't ever remember treating a black person any different based on skin colour. I've had black friends before. I've also not been alive for centuries. I'm not even two decades old yet. That's chronologically paradoxical. It also would make no difference. Do you think anger is passed down as an inherited trait? No; aggressive tendencies are a result of the frontal lobe being incapable of suppressing anger.


I'm sorry, but none of your arguments make sense. Your last one is literally that black people are still holding a grudge over what happened so many decades ago...every single one of them. Do you think that's realistic? Ockham's Razor would suggest not.

1: the continued disenfranchisement of black populations in the US
2: because the slavers didn't really keep records with the US government. it would take a lot of resources to figure out who came from where.

3:could be genetic http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 103136.htm

also, it's Occam's Razor, not ockham.

1. If it is biological that actually requires demonstrating cause and effect by means of population genetics and molecular neurobiology. The genetic basis of human behavior is not completely understood even though much progress is being made. But this would also involve human subjects and volunteer participation. I looked at the statistics you gave and what I noticed in particular is that the perpetrators of sexual violence were predominately white. I wonder if you've bothered to do your homework about the causes of violent behavior in human beings and what external circumstances trigger it. Violence is a form of competition. So given the lack of evidence that black people are biologically wired for violence I'm going to deploy Occam's razor and go with the simpler explanation that being poor and marginalized makes them desperate enough to use violence to get ahead.


2. They have the *right* to sue, but dont'cha know? To sue you need a legal council and most of the time that ain't free! In some cases lawyers will take a case pro bono but only if they have reason to think there's a good chance at winning. And that has a lot to do with politics and their relationship with judges. Most black Americans are too poor to use the court system to resolve disputes so like white southern rednecks and hillbilly's they take matters into their own hands......And that's how the "cycle of violence" gets started.


3. I don't care if you have had black friends. You like in BRITAIN. Black people in the UK came to your country voluntarily as immigrants whereas many black people in the US were brought here against their will as slaves. What makes you believe that injustices against black people in the US are a thing of the past and not the present? Equality under the law is just not enough. Because the world isn't made up of laws, it's made up of people. Now there are African immigrants in the US and those people are treated differently than black people who are descendants of slaves. Why do you suppose that is? And what is the evidence that aggressive behavior is caused by the frontal lobe being unable to suppress anger? If this is trait that is hereditary rather than epigenetic, show me the population genetic studies that suggest it's more common in blacks than whites!

It's somewhat frustrating to participate with threads like this. Those on the right love to use the postmodern/ intersectional feminist problem as an excuse to attack this amorphous thing they call the left, and those on the left tend to dismiss the problem as a pure rightwing distortion of their values for political gain. What seldom gets noticed by either faction is that the new illiberal feminism's oddly seem to be operating in lockstep with certain top down societal trends.

Last edited by Nebogipfel on 06 Feb 2016, 7:53 am, edited 6 times in total.

Those that identify with feminism is down in real terms

2013 Poll report those that identify as feminist as 28%
https://today.yougov.com/news/2013/05/0 ... irty-word/

2016 Poll reports 18%
http://www.vox.com/2015/4/8/8372417/fem ... ality-poll

That is down 10%

Most people agree on gender quality however.

I think the decline is in large part down to draconian regressives leaving a sour taste, and also a step change in how people see the whole equality issue being addressed.

Last edited by 0_equals_true on 06 Feb 2016, 7:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

The whole reason why intersectionalism has taken off is becuase they deep down know that equality isn't a single demographic issue. But also they have run out of thing to say or do, and need to beef up their movement with intersectonal "facts".

Sometimes this is helpful but other time they are really leaching of another movement, "appropriating" their issues.

also the "left" is in short of ideals and gets pushed by ultra-agendas whom eventually serve the opposite of what would be "left",
how to make emotions take over and get to gather, into some religiously-believed goal, as right as left,
and that went already always wrong