|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ZIFA
Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Location: Dici che il fiume..Trova la via al mare
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:50 am Post subject: |
 |
|
America has a problem because they segregated the races. Blacks live on this street, whites live on that one.
Its defacto apartheid. You just don't see that in other western countries. I mean the UK has far less racial tensions and much more racial intermixing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Madigan
Joined: 15 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Current relations, as well as their dysfunctions, of the black community in the United States, both within and without, are not comparable to South African government of the latter half of the 20th century. Indeed, the word "apartheid" isn't helpful. Why bring it up? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZIFA
Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Location: Dici che il fiume..Trova la via al mare
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Madigan wrote: |
| not comparable to South African government of the latter half of the 20th century. |
South Africa was the only country to enshrine racism into constitution and law.
But is the unspoken racial divide of the US really so different?
Whites also attack and beat up other whites. Happens every day. Is that a hate crime too, or only when a black person does it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
madoka
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Triban wrote: |
White trash? What would happen if we started saying black trash?
I rest my case. |
+1
When a white teenager gets beat by a dozen blacks for daring to date a black girl, it's not a hate crime:
http://www.truecrimereport.com/2009/09/was_the_beating_of_brian_milli.php
Two weeks after Brian Milligan, a white teen, reported being brutally beaten by black youths after being warned to stay away from his African-American girlfriend, there have been no protest marches.
Civil rights group have not demanded a Justice Department probe.
Al Sharpton has not visited. More to the point: Police still have little to go on in probing a "possible" hate crime, even though it's hard to imagine that no one in the neighborhood saw or has heard anything.
Milligan is home from the hospital, his father said, his jaw wired shut, his sense of smell destroyed, his brain still swollen after being hit in the head with a chunk of concrete. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RMNC wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
I'm not saying a beatdown deserved to happen, but good grief, going into a woman's bathroom and peeing standing up is not a good idea, even if you "look" like a woman.
Human beings engaged in defecation tend to respond instinctually to the strange.
I can see how a situation such as that could rapidly escalate, especially if drugs or alcohol are involved.
I mean if some perv dressed in woman's clothes went in the bathroom and started acting lecherous we would cheer a beatdown. A miscommunication in intent could lead to a woman thinking that was happening, rather than just a transgender person needing to relieve themselves. |
Dude, she's a woman, who cares how she positions herself while she pees? It just goes to show how ignorant the attackers are. Don't be one of them. |
A woman with an 'organ'?
I get it. But I also think that most women don't react well to uninvited organ in the bathroom. That tends to trip certain wires.
I'm just saying that we don't know what happened in that bathroom.
Sometimes men in women's clothes are transsexuals. Fine, protections and equality and all that. Other times they are perverts. They also could be both.
Also, sadly, if the employees had intervened they might have either gotten sued, arrested because as a man they touched a woman, or gotten injured and had to miss time off of work without compensation. I'm pretty sure that the policy McDonald's has is that in the event of a customer-on-customer altercation the employees are to call the police and stay out of it. I don't agree with this, but that's the world we live in.
EDIT- Just saw an article that said the fight started because one of the girls said "Stop looking at my man". While this gets rid of the "pervert in the bathroom" angle, it does bring into question whether it was a hate crime because I'm pretty sure those words have led to a fair number of fights in XX women vs XX women. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| rumdiary wrote: |
There is no comparison. Those times were far worse. |
Care to post some statistics that show there is no comparison between Great Depression Era violent crime rates and modern Black American violent crime rates? |
www.jrsa.org/programs/Historical.pdf
Well this shows that the murder rate was at an all time high in 1933. Though it only goes through 1998 the murder rate in the US has been declining since that time. I suppose this doesn't break anything down by race but I am with Rumdiary, people believe things were better in the past when in reality the past, almost invariable, was worse. |
The number of homocides per 100,000 among Great Depression Era Americans as demonstrated by that graph (somewhere between 10 and 11 per 100,000) is substantially lower than the number of homicides per 100,000 among modern Black Americans (21 per 100,000 in 2007). In fact, it's so much lower that Rumdairy's assertion that there is no comparison is more or less correct, just in the opposite way that he thought it was. If one had to choose between living surrounded by a cross-section of Great Depression Era Americas or a cross-section of Modern Black Americans, the safer choice is pretty obvious.
The overall violent crime rate is lower, but among a certain distinguishable sub-section of the population it is much higher, and that sub-section tends to cluster together. It's a real problem, and I don't think that problem should be trivialized. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
A woman with an 'organ'?
I get it. But I also think that most women don't react well to uninvited organ in the bathroom. That tends to trip certain wires. |
It shouldn't, and if it does, it's highly irrational. Even if the individual in question just went into the wrong bathroom by accident (something I myself must admit I've done), so what? Even responding with a harsh word is somewhat excessive; responding with violence is so ridiculous and barbarous that any individual who would do it cannot be trusted to walk the streets.
I don't think in my entire life I've met a pair of white girls who would attack someone in this fashion for using what they felt was the wrong bathroom. Literally ever. Nor have I met any two Korean women who would do it.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| I'm just saying that we don't know what happened in that bathroom. |
Unless what happened in the bathroom was attempted rape, mugging, or murder, it doesn't matter what happened in the bathroom: this was barbarous behavior that does not belong in a civilized country. And given how thoroughly this individual was beaten down, it's hard to imagine them feeling they had the strength to do any of the above.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Also, sadly, if the employees had intervened they might have either gotten sued, arrested because as a man they touched a woman, or gotten injured and had to miss time off of work without compensation. |
Yes, impoverished McDonalds workers are renown for their calculating utilitarian mode of conduct. Surely they all wanted to step in and help someone who was being beaten to death, but the math showed it was just too risky. McDonald's policy or not, you don't just sit there and watch something like this if you have the power to stop it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
It shouldn't, and if it does, it's highly irrational. Even if the individual in question just went into the wrong bathroom by accident (something I myself must admit I've done), so what? Even responding with a harsh word is somewhat excessive; responding with violence is so ridiculous and barbarous that any individual who would do it cannot be trusted to walk the streets.
I don't think in my entire life I've met a pair of white girls who would attack someone in this fashion for using what they felt was the wrong bathroom. Literally ever. Nor have I met any two Korean women who would do it. |
Well all of that went out the window with the new details in the story.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1379691/Transgender-girl-beaten-seizure-McDonalds-attack-victim-hate-crime.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
This was a case of "Don't look at my man". Violence over a man is certainly something that women the world over are capable of and do. The anti-transexual and racial angle is apparently done because if we are going to stereotype, the words "Don't look at my man" have caused many a brawl between black women. Heck those words are about the equivalent of AK-CLACK. I bet the second she yelled those words every person in the place went "oh boy, here we go". So the victim was being treated the same, regardless of gender or race.
And I've known plenty of white girls and Korean girls who would brawl. Go check out the trailer or check out a Korean High School.
| Quote: |
| Yes, impoverished McDonalds workers are renown for their calculating utilitarian mode of conduct. Surely they all wanted to step in and help someone who was being beaten to death, but the math showed it was just too risky. McDonald's policy or not, you don't just sit there and watch something like this if you have the power to stop it. |
And what, try and break them up and then have one of the hysterical ladies tell the cops that you molested her?
Bout the best you can do is throw cold water on them. Anything else and you are asking for a world of trouble.
Now 20 years ago before society went insane it would be alright to try and break them up, but now we have our lawsuit culture.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| rumdiary wrote: |
There is no comparison. Those times were far worse. |
Care to post some statistics that show there is no comparison between Great Depression Era violent crime rates and modern Black American violent crime rates? |
www.jrsa.org/programs/Historical.pdf
Well this shows that the murder rate was at an all time high in 1933. Though it only goes through 1998 the murder rate in the US has been declining since that time. I suppose this doesn't break anything down by race but I am with Rumdiary, people believe things were better in the past when in reality the past, almost invariable, was worse. |
The number of homocides per 100,000 among Great Depression Era Americans as demonstrated by that graph (somewhere between 10 and 11 per 100,000) is substantially lower than the number of homicides per 100,000 among modern Black Americans (21 per 100,000 in 2007). In fact, it's so much lower that Rumdairy's assertion that there is no comparison is more or less correct, just in the opposite way that he thought it was. If one had to choose between living surrounded by a cross-section of Great Depression Era Americas or a cross-section of Modern Black Americans, the safer choice is pretty obvious.
The overall violent crime rate is lower, but among a certain distinguishable sub-section of the population it is much higher, and that sub-section tends to cluster together. It's a real problem, and I don't think that problem should be trivialized. |
While they didn't keep racial data at the time, don't you think it might be likely that the poorest sections (IE blacks) of society probably suffered a much higher murder rate than the country as a whole at the time? If the murder rate on the whole during the depression was 50% higher then I imagine there is a good chance that the murder rate among blacks was also much higher. That doesn't even take into account the fact that the police at the time weren't as diligent about policing black areas, allowing them to become vice capitols such as New York City's Harlem. The data doesn't exist (that I have found) to get an exact murder rate for blacks during the Great Depression but I don't think it is that much of a stretch to assume it was at least comparable to the modern black murder rate if not higher.
I agree with you that the problem shouldn't be trivialized. I think our disagreement is that it is something new and modern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| While they didn't keep racial data at the time, don't you think it might be likely that the poorest sections (IE blacks) of society probably suffered a much higher murder rate than the country as a whole at the time? |
Modern poor Blacks are comparatively wealthier than even middle class people were during and previous to the Great Depression Era. "I'm poor because my family might not have food to eat each day," and, "I'm poor because I have enough money to live but spend it on drugs and frivolities, but none the less generally have food, a place to live, and a number of luxuries," are two very different things. As such, I'm fairly comfortable comparing modern poor Blacks to a full cross-section of the population from the Great Depression Era.
That said, if you have some city-specific violent crime data for the Great Depression that we could use to compare certain Black-heavy cities of the present to their Great Depression Era counterparts, I see no reason why we couldn't have that discussion.
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| If the murder rate on the whole during the depression was 50% higher then I imagine there is a good chance that the murder rate among blacks was also much higher. |
That's possible; if you have the data regarding it, I'm happy to talk about it. Given you say you don't have it later in the post (and I don't blame you for not having it), I'd rather not speculate about this particular point. You might be correct, but you might not be as well. I don't know that much about Great Depression Era Black culture.
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| That doesn't even take into account the fact that the police at the time weren't as diligent about policing black areas, allowing them to become vice capitols such as New York City's Harlem. |
Even with police intervention (and frankly, police intervention at levels which are pretty dubious from the perspective of civil rights), areas with high Black populations tend to be vice pits in the present. As such I'm not sure how much we can really draw from that.
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| I agree with you that the problem shouldn't be trivialized. I think our disagreement is that it is something new and modern. |
I'm not really even arguing it's new and modern. I'm just arguing the reverse of what Rumdairy seems to be: asserting that living in an era like the Great Depression would be more dangerous than, say, living in modern America in an area with a high concentration of urban Blacks is both difficult to prove and, I think, even counter-productive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rumdiary
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| rumdiary wrote: |
There is no comparison. Those times were far worse. |
Care to post some statistics that show there is no comparison between Great Depression Era violent crime rates and modern Black American violent crime rates? |
www.jrsa.org/programs/Historical.pdf
Well this shows that the murder rate was at an all time high in 1933. Though it only goes through 1998 the murder rate in the US has been declining since that time. I suppose this doesn't break anything down by race but I am with Rumdiary, people believe things were better in the past when in reality the past, almost invariable, was worse. |
The number of homocides per 100,000 among Great Depression Era Americans as demonstrated by that graph (somewhere between 10 and 11 per 100,000) is substantially lower than the number of homicides per 100,000 among modern Black Americans (21 per 100,000 in 2007). In fact, it's so much lower that Rumdairy's assertion that there is no comparison is more or less correct, just in the opposite way that he thought it was. If one had to choose between living surrounded by a cross-section of Great Depression Era Americas or a cross-section of Modern Black Americans, the safer choice is pretty obvious.
The overall violent crime rate is lower, but among a certain distinguishable sub-section of the population it is much higher, and that sub-section tends to cluster together. It's a real problem, and I don't think that problem should be trivialized. |
You are comparing two different things. Overall, murder and other violent crime is lower now than it has been in the past. My point is that people just think it's higher now because more gets videotaped, reported, and put on You Tube. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rumdiary
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| shifter2009 wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| rumdiary wrote: |
There is no comparison. Those times were far worse. |
Care to post some statistics that show there is no comparison between Great Depression Era violent crime rates and modern Black American violent crime rates? |
www.jrsa.org/programs/Historical.pdf
Well this shows that the murder rate was at an all time high in 1933. Though it only goes through 1998 the murder rate in the US has been declining since that time. I suppose this doesn't break anything down by race but I am with Rumdiary, people believe things were better in the past when in reality the past, almost invariable, was worse. |
The number of homocides per 100,000 among Great Depression Era Americans as demonstrated by that graph (somewhere between 10 and 11 per 100,000) is substantially lower than the number of homicides per 100,000 among modern Black Americans (21 per 100,000 in 2007). In fact, it's so much lower that Rumdairy's assertion that there is no comparison is more or less correct, just in the opposite way that he thought it was. If one had to choose between living surrounded by a cross-section of Great Depression Era Americas or a cross-section of Modern Black Americans, the safer choice is pretty obvious.
The overall violent crime rate is lower, but among a certain distinguishable sub-section of the population it is much higher, and that sub-section tends to cluster together. It's a real problem, and I don't think that problem should be trivialized. |
| Quote: |
| The rate increased through the early 1900s, peaking in 1933 at 9.7 murders per 100,000 population. |
VS.
| Quote: |
Compared to 6.8 murders per 100,000 in 2007 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rumdiary
Joined: 05 Jun 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
I'm not really even arguing it's new and modern. I'm just arguing the reverse of what Rumdairy seems to be: asserting that living in an era like the Great Depression would be more dangerous than, say, living in modern America in an area with a high concentration of urban Blacks is both difficult to prove and, I think, even counter-productive. |
Not what I said, but I wouldn't disagree that living in America during the Great Depression would be much worse than living in America today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rumdiary wrote: |
| You are comparing two different things. Overall, murder and other violent crime is lower now than it has been in the past. |
Overall it certainly seems to be. Within Black culture, that's less clear cut. One of the discussions in this thread (the one I'm participating in, and thus the one I'm making a point regarding) is about Black culture specifically. I thought that was clear, but you still seem to be responding as if it's not. To clarify: I agree with you that (obviously) the nation-wide averaged crime rate today is lower than in the Great Depression Era. The problem I (and I think certain others) are addressing here is that despite that, a certain sub-group of the population still has crime rates that are not only ridiculously high, but actually higher than the average crime rate of that era; an average crime rate which you yourself seem to consider unacceptably high (and rightly so!). That, combined with the fact that said group tends to cluster together, creates unacceptably dangerous areas, which in turn incidentally lead to events like the ones in the original video.
| rumdiary wrote: |
| My point is that people just think it's higher now because more gets videotaped, reported, and put on You Tube. |
Personally I think the Black-specific crime rate is high not because of any particular video, but because it statistically is high. So high that certain pockets of our country simply aren't fit for raising a family, doing business, or living life. If videos on you-tube help raise awareness of that, I think it's a good thing, not a bad one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
