Ahhh - the "I was mocking defense"

Singer Mick Jagger and the band defended the song, saying the lyrics mocked actual stereotypical feelings towards a women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Some_Girls_(Rolling_Stones_song)

*
It's 1:00 am at Jane & Sheppard in Toronto... do you know where
your 11 year old is?

" -- TORONTO -- Toronto Mayor David Miller called Sunday
for tougher gun laws after a spate of late-night shootings
left an 11-year-old and two others dead in unrelated incidents."

“It's very clear that gun violence is connected to the ownership
of guns,” Mr. Miller told the media.

See... I'm thinking it's very clear that gun violence is connected
to thugs in the Jane Street gangs.

I'd be afraid of this area at 1:00 am.

But that's just me.

*

'nough to make ya puke.

neo: That's the usual from Miller, he calls for getting tough on gun violence and registering guns after each shooting. Now he'll crawl back to his hole till the next one.
Talk about a useless prig. Like all Lefties he has no clue, can't face the truth when it's hitting him in the face.

IT'S not obscene or racist if it's true. Maybe the Rolling Stones have been collecting data all these years, after all they have been in 'positions' to know. One thing I DO ACCEPT AS TRUE is that Mick & Co. no longer 'has the jam' to like, you know... go all night.

Or alternately:

And as we wind on down the road
Our shadows taller than our soul
There walks a lady we all know
Who shines white light and wants to show
How everything still turns to gold
And if you listen very hard
The tune will come to you at last
When all are one and one is all
To be a Rock and not to Roll
Woe oh oh oh oh oh
And she's buying a stairway to heaven

Thus if you find your tune is a "Le(a)d Zeppelin"

Try a "Helium Zeppelin" instead, they float better.

I've always maintained hope floats.

Cheers

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht BGS, PDP, CFP

Commander in Chief

Frankenstein Battalion

2nd Squadron: Ulanen-(Lancers) Regiment Großherzog Friedrich von Baden (Rheinisches) Nr.7(Saarbrucken)

Knecht Rupprecht Division

Hans Corps

1st Saint Nicolaas Army

Army Group “True North”

I think the obvious question is, what the f#$% was a child that young doing there in the first place. My youngest is 12, and I can guarantee that she would never be in that position (I would never raise my kids in that shithole ) Criminal charges should be laid against the parents or parent. Time for the idiots to take responsibility for their community, and time for the idiot parents to take charge of their children.

So long as you set it to music? Well of course, at least to some degree ;-) Consider the medium. Seriously. Commentary mostly happens in the front and top of our brains. Song (think songbird) has much deeper roots in the bottom and back of our brains. Ergo, it should not be surprising that we use significantly different axiological functions to determine relative values within each of the contexts. Now, I'm not saying whether or not this is good or bad, I'm just saying that it's both.

My grand-daughter, (12 years old), is here in Toronto from her home country for her first visit to Canada.
Her grandmother and I, took this child to the circus, a couple of weeks ago. Our tickets have seating numbers on them, and every gateway into the Air Canada Center has a number above it, and a very fit young male usher, to direct us to the seats which correspond to our tickets.
The lights go down, and the performace started, and our little family was watching the clowns and acrobats, when all of a sudden, my head and upper body jerked foreward!?! I had just been whacked with two somethings! My wife, sitting beside me, saw me jerk foreward!
I turned around to look at what had caused this: A little Black boy, perhaps five or six years old, had just kicked me in the head, with both feet! He had accomplished this, by sitting down in the well between his seat and the one in front of his. Braced his arms against the side of the well, and lashed out with both feet!
It gets better- he was still in position to take another kick at me as he stayed in eye-contact! I mean-hey- I don't expect a five year old kid to know how to say: "Excuse me?" But his mother, ( a woman in her late-twenties), had witnessed this thing- she could have said something? But neither one of them said a word.
And the expression on both mother and child's faces, was, like "Waddya gonna do about this?"
My wife started to freak out, ( she thought I was gonna 'over-react'. I took another look at the folks behind us, then laughed, and said (louder than necessary) "I thought we were going to the circus- looks like we have gone to the f**king zoo, instead!
Personally, I feel that only very stupid people go out of their way to intimidate strangers. (The stranger might be armed, and end the thing for an eternity.)
On it's present course, the whole of Toronto will turn into the zoo, that parts of it are in already. For all of you who dispise this city, you probably think that is a fitting end for this place. I just feel really bad, for the folks who were born here, lived here all their lives, and never considered moving someplace else- surely they deserve something better than this?

"For all of you who dispise this city, you probably think that is a fitting end for this place"

Jeez, ya read my mind!!

Horny Toad

Sheik Yerbootie:"I just feel really bad, for the folks who were born here, lived here all their live ..."

I'm sure that Miller is right ... as soon as guns are out of the duck hunter's hands all of Toronto's problems will be solved.

kingstonlad: Don't know if the aforementioned 'shithole' was Toronto or the apartment building, but if the latter, I believe I heard a Global TV reporter say that the building is 'city owned', (or somesuch), which, of course, suggests that the inhabitants are on 'benefits', something about which, (also 'of course'), we shouldn't be 'judgemental'.

Sheik Yerbootie: A little Black boy, perhaps five or six years old, had just kicked me in the head, with both feet!

And why do you feel it's important to mention that the boy was Black?

And while we're at it, Sheik, why did you feel it important to mention it was a BOY? Or his age? Or the fact it was a circus?

Wouldn't "An anonymous incident MIGHT have occurred at an unspecified location" have sufficed? ;-)

kingstonlad, lets see, no fathers, no faith, no morals ,no discipline, social workers who also lack the same. what the hell do we expect. society won't punish criminals so the shitstorm just keeps getting bigger.

The shooting took place at a public housing project(read ghetto)in North Toronto. It happened at a birthday celebration for the kid's cousin and two eighteen year olds. In typical fashion, one of the intended targets is not cooperating with police. Nor it seems, are any of the other witnesses. The party "got out of hand" and many uninvited guests were in attendance. This type of activity is typical on a summer's night in Toronto. I guess the "summer of the gun" celebrations got started a little late this year.
This coming weeked is the annual "Caribana" festival in Toronto. This colourful event usually draws the attention of gang members from all over, so check the statistics a week from now.

Could it be people describe people as "Black" because they are "Black", the shootings are occurring in their ghettos and the shooters are "Black"?

Behavior of a small child in public may not be a place to mention color of skin, but it may be a place for parents or guardians to start with teaching proper behavior and respect for others.

If the words are too stupid or outrageous to speak set them to music, you may have a hit! Doesn't hurt if you garble them either.

Liz J: Could it be people describe people as "Black" because they are "Black"...

Yeah, if only that applied across the board. Remember, say, the murder of Reena Virk? Do you recall anybody reporting that "The Crown has begun begun its murder case against white 17-year-old Kelly Ellard"?

Or how about CTV.ca's current top story: "Accused Caucasian pedophile Peter Whitmore due in court"?

Do ya think there might be a bit of a double-standard here?

Liz J: Could it be people describe people as "Black" because they are "Black"...

Yeah, if only that applied across the board. Remember, say, the murder of Reena Virk? Do you recall anybody reporting that "The Crown has begun begun its murder case against white 17-year-old Kelly Ellard"?

Or how about CTV.ca's current top story: "Accused Caucasian pedophile Peter Whitmore due in court"?

Do ya think there might be a bit of a double-standard here?

A'dam, If the police are describing a suspect, skin color is part of the description. Would you prefer they only refer to skin color when the suspect is white and not mention it when suspect is black?
You certainly seem overly sensitive to skin color and extremely offensive playing defense.

Liz J: If the police are describing a suspect, skin color is part of the description.

Well, yeah, sure, if you're in the middle of hunting down a suspect. Then it's entirely justified for the purpose of quickly identifying and tracking a specific individual.

But my original question to Sheik was why he thought the race of the kid who kicked him was pertinent information to share. Is the 5 year old an active suspect in anything? No. Is Sheik trying to identify him and track him down? No. So, given the topic of this thread, what else could his little anecdote possibly be trying to insinuate? "Young boy is aggressive and unruly in public, while parents sit silent" vs. "Young black boy is aggressive and unruly in public, while parents sit silent." Hmmmm, I wonder.

Question, Liz -- you said yourself that the "behavior of a small child in public may not be a place to mention color of skin." So why are your comments all addressed to me, and none to Sheik?

Adam, I dunno, maybe cuz of stuff like this?

http://ireintellect.wordpress.com/2007/05/05/people-who-perpetuate-stereotypes-infuriate-me/

"If I said, 12 black people in the back row of a movie theatre wouldn’t shut the fuck up, about 50% of people would probably think I’m a racist, just for mentioning race in the statement.
Hilariously enough, if I said, 12 people in the back row of a movie theatre wouldn’t shut the fuck up,' about 80%-90% of people’s thoughts would immediately scoot over to 'they probably were black.'"

Or maybe this:

www.hotghettomess.com

Kathy, I agree, everyone is guilty of thinking and acting at times in prejudicial ways. But here's an important difference: whereas most people don't actual like that aspect of themselves and thus try to do better, others prefer to revel in it.

Hey A'dam is it okay if the media show pictures of the victims and we notice that most of them are black. Keep your head in the sand I sure the problems will go away just like funny coloured moles and lumps never turn into cancer.

"It's not true that we don't have speech rights in this country.

In fact, you are free to republish and distribute pretty much any type of race-based commentary you like...So long as you set it to music."

Or if you are a recognized visible or politically correct minority...regardless of the racist and bigoted spew from these quarters, everyone knows that minorities are incapable of discrimination...at least the CHRC and other social engineering quisling clinics have determined this.

I guess that, according to A'dam, if you notice that something walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, then you must be bigotted against ducks.

I'm fairly certain that Sheik was replying to Neo's ff-topic comment about the shooting death of the 11-year old in Toronto...hence, he related a story about a badly behaving black kid and the black kid's obviously indifferent parent. I took it as his suggestion that it isn't just the odd individual to blame, but a cultural thing with the blacks in Toronto.

I don't agree with such a suggestion...you can't extrapolate from one instance up to the general population. But it was at least "topical" to Neo's comment...that's why he mentioned the kid was black.

But...more shootings and (I suspect) all within the black community...and likely with a decided Jamaican flavour. But, hey, just coincidence, right?

*
"Eeyore said... Neo's ff-topic comment"

since the original post seemed to be about a culture
of neglect and violence, i felt my comment was relevant.

in the interest of fair play, i will be googling for the
terms - "birthday party, murder and hockey game"
to try balance the scale.

eeyore... that work for you?

*

It's certainly time to stop bantering with people here to try to smack on labels for telling it as it is.
If there is a shooting in Toronto and it's in a neighborhood known as a Black community/ghetto, the victims are black, the suspects are black, we simply can't deny it. Add to that, the victims will not ID the shooters even when they know who they are.

How will it ever be sorted out by keeping in place the very environment to foster more of the same behavior?

As for Sheik's comment, it tied in with neo's comment as Eeyore mentioned. Behavior patterns start at an early age, bad behavior should be checked. In BLACK ghettos you may find many children without fathers around to be fathers and share the burden. Welfare can't replace that.
Denying the facts won't make them go away.

A'dam, maybe you should go see what you can do about it, you seem to have all the answers.
First you'll have to take off the blinders and shake the state of denial.
Maybe go have a chat with David Miller the Useless Mayor of Toronto.

Eeyore: I don't agree with such a suggestion...you can't extrapolate from one instance up to the general population.

I believe that is the first instance in which somebody else on this thread decided to contest Sheik's insinuation. I basically said the exactly same thing as you in my 5:15 AM post, but because I'm one of the resident "trolls," people immediately defended Sheik's position and took issue with mine (or rather, ours). I wonder, will they also shoot down your post as well? Somehow I doubt it. There are double standards at play here even when it comes to shooting the messenger.

Eeyore, Neo: Try Googling, I dunno, "Canada and pedophile" or "Canada and serial killers," notice that the majority of cases involve offenders who happen to be white, and then see if your same logic model of "More offenses all within the X community...But, hey, just coincidence, right?" still holds.

*
"a'dam said... Try Googling, "Canada and serial killers"

so you're saying that a peter whitmore, or a paul bernardo
cancels out all the mounting black-on-black gun crime
in toronto?

wow... that's a relief.

*

"And why do you feel it's important to mention that the boy was Black?"

A'dam; why do you feel it's important to capitalize the colour Black?"

neo: so you're saying that a peter whitmore, or a paul bernardo cancels out all the mounting black-on-black gun crime in toronto

No, genius, I'm saying that an observed correlation doesn't necessarily imply relevancy, let alone causality.

Yes Adam, but white people don't listen to music that glorifies serial killers and pedophiles, and if we know there is a serial killer or pedophile in the neighbourhood, we don't neglect to call the cops because that would be "snitching"...

If someone complains about violent movies that seem to glamourize serial killers, they aren't condemned for "acting black" or told "but its part of our culture!"

White people I know also don't tend to let their kid's "birthday parties" go on until 1AM either, but hey, that's just me, right?

Please don't tell me people at Jane Finch don't call the cops because they're afraid to. It's called Crime Stoppers.

I'll "do better" about my "racist" views when others stop giving me so much juicy material to work with.

Adam,

Try googling, oh I dunno, "Census Canada 2001" and you'll find that 83.3% of the Canadian population is white. The 16.7% of the population classified as visible minority and aboriginal commit criminal acts all out of proportion to their numbers. However, this can't be conclusively proved because race-based crime statistics are conveniently illegal.

RichfisherA'dam; why do you feel it's important to capitalize the colour Black?

Because Sheik did, in his/her original post, and I was responding to that comment. Personally, I oscillate between upper and lower cases.

Did you have a broader point than just my grammar?

Between ocillations, capitalizations and a host of other stupid and inane banter, I proffer this.
I am not a Catholic but right now I need one to light a candle for my corrupted soul.
You see, I just watched our local TV station feature one of those Toronto feel-good types ruminating about the latest shooting. After going through all the reasons why the locals won't call the cops etc. etc, he cliamed that the only solution to this was to BAN ALL HANDGUNS! I then lost it totally, and was so vociferous that my wife threw me out of the living-room.
I am in need of an intervention, I guess, due to my perverted view of the whole situation.

Kathy: Yes Adam, but white people don't listen to music that glorifies serial killers and pedophiles, and if we know there is a serial killer or pedophile in the neighbourhood, we don't neglect to call the cops because that would be "snitching"...

Oh Kathy, this is becoming delightfully absurd. My point all along was that it would actually be quite ridiculous to draw a causal link between "white culture" and serial killing or pedophilia, and here you are trying to formulate actual arguments for why such an association is, like, totally NOT the same as the one that you insist exists between "black culture" and violent crime.

White people I know also don't tend to let their kid's "birthday parties" go on until 1AM either, but hey, that's just me, right?

You've clearly never spent much time in the greater Los Angeles area.

Please don't tell me people at Jane Finch don't call the cops because they're afraid to. It's called Crime Stoppers.

Well, at the neighbourhood level, we're talking about small communities, so even anonymous tip-lines don't offer 100% safety. More important, though, is the deep-seated mistrust of the police force, understandably borne of a long history of discriminatory policing and judicial practices. And please don't tell me that this is typical leftist abrogation of personal responsibility. I (as do leaders within the black community) acknowledge that community members themselves need to better condemn criminal activity in their midst and cooperate with law enforcement when required. But even the T.O. police force acknowledges that instances of racism and discrimination on their part, past and present, were and are a part of the problem, and are taking steps to reach out to the community and break down the mistrust.

[Incidentally, there are many parallels between this proactive strategy and the ones seeking to reach out to moderate Muslim Canadians, so that a mistrust of authorities does not become a self-imposed barrier to reporting any suspicious activity observed among more radical factions. But I digress.]

I'll "do better" about my "racist" views when others stop giving me so much juicy material to work with.

Suggesting to me that you're interested only in judging and condemning these communities from a distance. Which frankly is a rather sad, not to mention rather un-Catholic, way to live.

Ever oscillate White?

Oh, A'dam, you're either dense or playing a naysayer. Your basic view that you can't generalize about the whole, based on the actions of an individual is essentially correct. However, looking at this statistically (were the statistics available, mind you), I suspect that crimes by blacks and aboriginals would be far and away the biggest percentage.

If the quoted Census 2001 number is correct and whites account for over 80% of the population, then all else being equal, 80% of the violent crimes should be perpetrated by whites. But this is not the case...not even close, I suspect. In Toronto, the number of murders (specifically) is more like 80% by blacks. Are there extenuating circumstances for this...of course! But it is not only blacks who are poor, disadvantaged, disenfranchised or subject to discrimination...so find another reason other than those.

In my opinion, this is like saying that "smoking causes lung cancer". I know MANY people who have smoked for years and never got cancer...but statistically speaking, it can be shown and be accepted as a reasonable maxim that, indeed, smoking causes lung cancer. I view the discussions we've been having about blacks (specifically Jamaicans) in the same light. For such a relatively small population, they perpetrate an inordinately significant amount of the violent crimes (at least in Toronto).

Not Somalis, not Zimbabweans, not South Africans, not Bermudans, not Trinidadians...Jamaicans.

To state this as "fairly" as I can (acknowledging that I am not in possession of all of the statistics because they aren't available)...the Jamaican community in Toronto demonstrates a statistically significant and, compared to all other ethnic groups (no, "white" is not an ethnicity), an overwhelmingly-high propensity to violence.

*
'a'dam then snivels... "observed correlation doesn't
necessarily imply relevancy"'

oh, you mean like branding anyone who doesn't
agree with you... a card carrying member
of the kkk?

ok, i get it.

*

Adam -- I believe you are seeing negative racial sterotyping in a context where mentioning race at all simply reflects the natural way we express ourselves. In describing an incident, mentioning an obvious characteristic of a perpetrator contributes authenticity to the story. Since, according to JP, 83% of the population is white, we don't bother mentioning "white" in descibing crimes committed by whites, but it is quite normal -- and I don't think offensive-- to mention race when describing an incident involving non-whites (e.g. a nice Chinese girl helped me across the street.) I think if you think about it, you would probably recognize that it would be perfectly normal in Barbados (for example) to identify the race of a white pedophile. And I doubt anyone would be considered racist for doing so. Race is just one of many lenses through which we view the world. It is very artificial to "pretend" we did not notice the race of someone, and having noticed it is natural to include it as a detail in a story. And just for the record, the real culprit in this story is, I believe, the black mother (at least I assume she is black, but maybe I'm not being "inclusive" enough in making this assumption.) People themselves identify with their own race -- and if race goes unacknowledged, they themselves are being short changed. Race is part of who we are, not in a basic human sense, but in terms of our cultural experience.

Eeyore says: "Your basic view that you can't generalize about the whole, based on the actions of an individual is essentially correct." I agree, but am inclined to qualify this somewhat -- or maybe just express the same thought in a different way. I believe that our opinions about a group of people are in fact formed by the impressions we get from the actions of many individuals over time. If I know only one German, I still cannot help but formulate an impression about Germans, based on my impressions of the one I know. As I meet two, three, or more Germans, I will continually modify my "stereotype", but I will also look for patterns -- that's how we think. I don't feel that this in itself is problematical. In fact, I believe we can ONLY think about a group of people by relying on general impressions or "stereotypes". (Test this yourself -- try thinking about ANY group of people without resorting to some sort of stereotype.) Stereotypes, themselves, can be positive or negative. The problem arises only when we take the impressions we have of a group and project them onto the individual. Stereotypes are based on our cumulative impressions of individuals in the group, but not every member of a group will fit the stereotype.

A'dam:
I don't normally reply to simpltons but: I have never been deliberatly kicked in the head, ( in a public place)- before.........(So- if I happen to mention that the kid who kicked me in the head was Black- offends you: eat my shorts!
Sitting directly in front of my family, at that circus,( or: 'zoo')- were two Black families of 13 people, one adult male. Sitting directly beside us, were a further 17 black people, no adult males, and sitting directly behind us- fourteen black people, one adult male.
Please forgive my political incorrectittude for mentioning this- K?
And I probably should not mention-either- the physically-fit young dude, (the 'usher') who was standing in the aisle and watched this go down! (Waddya think he was there for, Stupid?)
Next time there is a major Basketball thing happening in Toronto, go to any Subway station, and count how many ARMED TTC Security People you see on the platform! Crap- this is really getting 'politically unnaceptable' isn't it?
Hey- Kathy Shaidle, (sorry about the sp)- that remember personal info? thing, is switched to yes. Waiting to personally hear from youse.

LindaL, I agree that it would be artificial to pretend not to see race, but it’s also interesting how selective we are as a society about when and where we see it.

My initial comment on this thread took issue with “Sheik Yerbootie” describing the kid who kicked him as “a little Black boy, perhaps five or six years old.” Were these three details – age, gender, race – used only to paint a more vivid scene? I don’t believe they were, especially given the context in which this anecdote was offered – itself describing an aggressive act by an undisciplined child on a blog that has a history of perpetuating and condoning racial stereotyping. I think his implication is that all these descriptors are relevant – indeed, causal – to the child’s unruly behaviour. Remove the word “Black” from Sheik’s sentence and the implication changes significantly; and if the child had been white, I suspect his anecdote wouldn’t have mentioned race at all. It also explains why the child wasn’t described as “a little Black boy in a blue polo shirt, perhaps five or six years old…” In nobody’s mind is wearing a blue polo shirt associated with aggression or lax parenting skills.

As well, the double standard of mentioning race only in situations involving non-whites may be “quite normal,” but it’s still problematic. And given the potential negative fallout that can (and often does) result, it's irresponsible to argue that the racial/ethnic backgrounds of "whites" can be treated as "invisible" simply because they're the majority. Often, the consequence of "seeing" race only with respect to certain visible minorities is that their race becomes a salient feature of their identity regardless of context or circumstance. Saying that a nice Chinese girl helped you across the street is indeed innocuous, but it still defines the girl in large part by her “Chinese-ness.” Would you prefer to be complimented as “a very nice person” or “a very nice white person” (or whatever ethnicity/race you happen to be)?

In fact, it might be a useful exercise to spend some time describing everyone by their racial background, in even the most innocuous of situations (“Jill, I’d like you to meet my white friend, Jack.” “Jack, this is the Jewish girl I was telling you about.”). For once, applying the same racial lens to everyone equally – including English, Irish, etc. – may help to illustrate just how ridiculous and potentially offensive such an approach is.

The double standard is exponentially worse when the context is a negative one. In Virginia Tech, the shooter was South Korean Seung-Hui Cho; in Columbine, the shooters were Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. In Toronto, Jordan Manners was assumed to be killed by a black teenager (identity protected by the YCJA); in Taber, Alberta, Jason Lang was assumed to be killed by a teenager (identity protected by the YCJA).

Arguing that “mentioning race at all simply reflects the natural way we express ourselves” offers an explanation, but not an excuse. If you basically agree with Eeyore that “you can't generalize about the whole, based on the actions of an individual,” and you also believe that it’s problematic to “take the impressions we have of a group and project them onto the individual,” then we need to resist our “natural” psychological proclivity to view the world through racial/ethnic stereotypes, whether of blacks or Germans or kids in blue polo shirts.

Sheik Yerbootie: I'm surprised you didn't complain to the management that your family was accidentally seated in the "blacks only" section.

LindaL, everyone else: What do you think of Sheik's latest comment? Do you think he's still just describing the incident in greater depth, with race being just one of many innocuous details? Or is he suggesting something prejudicial about these 30-odd circus-goers in relation to his general views on blacks and violence (i.e., "taking the impressions we have of a group and project them onto the individual")? And if so, will you come out and condemn his words?

(sigh)

It is obvious, that to the deluded left, if you complain about ethnic Germans, Dutch, English, Poles, Russians, etc. or complaining about Christians or complaining about bikers or rednecks, then you're just complaining.

But if you complain about ethnic Jamaicans, Chinese, Iraqis, Saudis, Mexicans, native North Americans, etc. or complaining about Islamists or complaining about gang bangers, then you're racist.

Talk about your double standards, eh, A'dam? We should run a test...Kate should post about the (oh, I don't know, let's say...) Welsh and we should all criticize the Welsh and watch for ABSOLUTELY NO COMPLAINTS FROM THE LEFTY MORONS ABOUT RACISM. Why? Because the Welsh are white.

The only reason you're posting here, A'dam, is to try to denounce us as racists, fascists and extremists. So, you twist and spin and smear...give it a break, dude, you're getting boring.

By the way, LindaL, I agree with your qualification and your posts entirely.

Eeyore: Kate should post about the (oh, I don't know, let's say...) Welsh...

Ah, but that's just it, Eeyore -- she never would, would she? When she blogs about Mickie Roan Beckford, he's a Jamaican guy. When she blogs about (oh, I don't know, let's say...) Peter Whitmore, he's just Peter Whitmore. Both career criminals, both worthy of condemnation, but only for one is ethnicity an issue around here.

Ah yes, the old 'you're judgemental' thing from a non-christian biblical illiterate. Yawn. Another way they try to shut us up. Won't work. Read the whole chapter where Jesus says "don't judge" -- and see how he immediately starts advising us exactly how to judge others!

The reason Yerbooti mentioned that the kids were black is because, as I've already told you, black people often act rude in theatres and so forth and also don't discipline their children properly. Everybody knows that. It's there culture, man! Its also one big reason movie theatre attendance has been dropping for years.

If you don't like that fact, tell your fellow black people to act better and we won't have to keep mentioning it all the time.

mkay? Pretty simple.

"on a blog that has a history of perpetuating and condoning racial stereotyping."

You're a sore looser, A'dam.

And you need a spell-checker, richfisher.

A'dam:
“Were these three details – age, gender, race – used only to paint a more vivid scene?” – Not exactly, they are used to relate how he experienced the situation. It’s normal to notice and mention race and other generic stuff as it’s experienced in a public situation where you don’t otherwise know much about the person. It would be quite artificial to not mention race if it was part of one’s experience.

“if the child had been white, I suspect his anecdote wouldn’t have mentioned race at all” . . . that’s right, because, as I explained, it’s not normal to mention the race when that race is the majority. It’s redundant. In a mostly black context, I will probably mention if someone is white.

“on a blog that has a history of perpetuating and condoning racial stereotyping” – A'dam . . . here I think it is YOU stereotyping people on this blog . . . thinking we’re all red-necks or something (metaphorically speaking – I personally have nothing against people with red necks). What is the case, however, is that people on this blog do tend to be less reverential about political correctness. Personally, I find this refreshingly honest.

Kate was bang-on with her assessment, A'dam...you are dense!

As I said before, "white" is not an ethnicity. Whitmore is a white pedophile...with a name of Whitmore, I suspect he has an English ethnicity, but this is not for certain. I am not aware of any statistics that indicate that that the English are more prone to pedophilia than any other ethnicity. Are you?

For that matter, I'm not aware of any statistics linking ANY ethnicity to a propensity for pedophilia. Therefore, when talking about a pedophile, race is apparently NOT a factor.

There ARE statistics that indicate that blacks (particularly Jamaicans, in the Toronto area at least) and aboriginals account for an inordinately large percentage of the violent crimes (and likely other anti-social behaviour) in Canada. So, when talking about violent crimes (and, potentially, other anti-social behaviour), race/ethnicity IS a factor.

Duh!

If we were talking about organized crime, we'd be primarily fingering the Italian mafia (exclusively "white"). So, when someone says "organized crime", everyone first thinks "Aha! Those durned Italians!" and NO ONE squeals about racism, even though the same arguments you've been putting forward would apply. Not all Italians are involved in organized crime, but an inordinately large percentage of "organized criminals" are Italian...not all Jamaicans are violent criminals, but an inordinately large percentage of violent criminals are Jamaican.

Get over it, buddy.

A'dam -- since you asked, I think that Sheik's latest comments identify a real problem -- a problem that I have heard described by members of the Black community itself . . . young black males lack positive role models. Political correctness may try to prevent us from naming something like this, but if we do not name it, recognize it, then nothing can be done to address the issue. Young Black males lack positive male role models for a very understandable reason . . . marriage before childbearing is not a central part of the culture, and I also believe that this cultural reality is a residual effect of slavery where cohesive family units among Blacks were deliberately prevented. The lack of positive male role models is also an important force in Black gang culture. (There are other types of racial gangs, of course, but here I am primarily talking about what I think is a specific driver among Black youth gangs.) I am not sure what would account for the apparent indifference of the mother in not disciplining her child in Sheik's original story . . . maybe some of the women in this group have just given up -- and who could blame them? While the difficulties being experienced in our Black communities are understandable, it is also important for all of us to find some way to fix these problems. I think that to some degree, refusing to name the problem in an effort to be politically correct is akin to putting on blinders, and it does a disservice to everyone.

I used to work in a call centre in eastern Scarborough. It was a racially mixed environment; I'd say roughly 1/3 white, 1/3 black, and 1/3 "other" (middle eastern, asian, south american, etc.)

My team of ten had three black members, two women and a man. The man was married to a woman who worked on another team at the company; both of them were as polite, well-mannered, and professional as anyone I've known, and I always enjoyed their company, both at work and at social events. (Both were top performers at their jobs, as well.)

One of the women was a mother, living with her husband and their three kids. Besides working a full day at the call centre, she also painted and sketched, and one of her proudest moments was announcing to our team her showing at a local art gallery.

The other woman had been working as a stripper, and she wanted to get out of that life. However, the vastly higher amounts of money she was offered to take her clothes off won out, and she left the team after about six months.

But that was my team; on other teams, there were blacks who dressed in strict ghetto style - do-rags, pants falling off their waists, NBA jerseys, etc. While standing near their group during breaks, I began to hear terms such as "baby mother"; for those who don't know, that's a woman who the "man" (and I use the term loosely) has had a baby with, but has no significant relationship with the woman.

And I remember one day when the women on my team were all huddled together, discussing something in shocked tones. After some probing, they admitted to me that someone had gone into the women's washroom, and smeared feces all over the walls and sinks. I too was shocked, and asked "Who would do something like that?". The (black) artist woman I mentioned earlier looked me straight in the eye and said "Some nigger.".

My point? There are many black people in Toronto who are just like every "normal" citizen I know; they live by the law, they work, they marry, they have children they love and try to raise to be good citizens. I'll go so far as to say that most black people in Toronto fit this profile.

But there is also a black sub-culture where men abandon their children, where women give birth to kids from several fathers (did no one else notice that Ephraim Brown's sisters had different last names, "Brown" and "Taylor"?), and where 11-year olds have birthday parties lasting until 1:00 am in the morning. I'm not saying any of these type of behaviours are unknown among white people, but I will say they are relatively rare compared to the black community.

Unfortunately, the decent, hard-working, family oriented black people I described get zero press, just as all the good things our troops are doing in Afghanistan are minimized while every death or injury gets front page coverage. I would never
paint every black person with the "Jane/Finch" brush, but to ignore that there are a lot of aggressive, armed, angry young black men in Toronto is to stick your head deeper in the sand than David Miller has. And where do those armed, angry, aggressive young black men get their start? By being angry, aggressive black kids whose mothers don't bother to discipline them, and who don't have fathers around to take up the slack.

So I understand Sheik's post; he sees the cycle perpetuating itself, and he feels compelled to mention it. I don't blame him. We used to live in a world where 'shame' was a moderating force. Now, pace Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, and Nick Nolte, shame is just another tool for amping their publicity.

Am I prejudiced? Probably. If I meet a black man who is dressed in a suit and tie, who speaks English properly (not "Yo, man, wassup?"), and who seems to accept the same basic values that I do, I'm more than willing to treat him like I would treat any white man who met the same criteria. And when I see a black man dressed in "gangsta" clothes, with corn-rows or dreadlocks - I'll cross the street.

When anyone puts on clothes, makeup, and styles their hair, they are deliberately putting on a face for the world outside. So long as a persistent black minority wants to portray themselves as "gangstas", the white majority (and the Chinese community, who almost uniformly loathe blacks) will continue to distrust and fear them.

A'dam may not like any of this, but this is an honest reflection of Toronto's reality; if he doubts it, I encourage him to contact me directly. I'll show him what he needs to change his mind.

KevinB: Am I prejudiced? Probably.

THANK YOU, KevinB! Hell, I'm prejudiced too. At least acknowledging THAT is the first step towards a less prejudiced society. That's all I'm trying to get people here to admit.

***For those who believe themselves to be free of racial prejudice, I recommend going here and taking the "Race IAT" demonstration test. I guarantee it will open your eyes.***

Unfortunately, the decent, hard-working, family oriented black people I described get zero press...

That would be one example of the systemic structural discrimination I referred to earlier. You'll also note that I referred earlier to the need for the black community to address its own problems, including critical reflection on the "ghetto subculture," parenting arrangements, the relative lack of positive role models, etc. So, we are mostly in agreement here.

I would never paint every black person with the "Jane/Finch" brush...

And this is the crux of the issue for me. The fact is, there are certain posters here who would paint with that brush. My problem is with them.

"My problem is with them."
A'dam

Your problem is with you.