I don't understand "black lives matter"

[Otta]

Awkward!

[Loz]

miga Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I also agree with Loz, if I may paraphrase, that any broadly based social justice movement will

> have inconsistencies and imperfections and logical flaws.

Sort of, but not quite what I said. I was suggesting that BLM chooses its battles more carefully. Defending someone using a 5 year old as a human shield I think reduces the potency of their argument.

But what you said I agree with as well.

[LondonMix]

I did not scream loudly at you and I don't need your condescending invitation to participate on the forum.

You are the only person screaming and throwing around insults. I was at times specifically responding to a question you quoted asking me regarding All Lives Matter.

Within a debate around black lives matter, it's not unreasonable to question why you are questioning the correlation of stats as concerns black shooting deaths. If you simply were on a tangent about statistical correlations with zero intention to suggest there was a lack of bias in shootings so be it but honestly multiple people thought you were questioning the existence of bias, so your intention es not crystal clear. Even those trying to defend you had know idea what you were on about...

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You have all the necessary information, LM, but

> just can't piece it together.

>

> BB posted a query about the original stat that I

> posted and suggest there was a correlation, so I

> asked BB to apply it to another stat - one that I

> believed that BB would accept more

> unquestioningly. The point being to show that the

> correlation BB was suggesting was not valid and

> show this by applying it to a different stat. BB

> then put forward a related stat so I posted the

> stats to show that wasn't actually correct. My

> entire point from the start was even if the

> correlation did exist, it would not necessarily

> show causation anyway. Yet - and rather

> ironically - you read it as if I was providing it

> as 'evidence' of whatever it was you had decided

> to get you knickers in a twist about.

>

> Whilst I agree that understanding the finer points

> of that wasn't terribly easy, coming to the

> conclusions you managed to make was really rather

> ridiculous. You somehow made "2 + 2 = fish".

> Loudly.

>

> As further information (though with the associated

> danger that you will misconstrue this just as

> badly), the 'male prison rates' stat is

> interesting. As civilservant agreed, there is a

> significant bias in the justice system against

> men... but there is also studies to show men

> commit more crimes than women. So what does the

> 93% male prison population conclude?? On its own,

> absolutely nothing. You can't make the stat show

> causation - and this is important - for EITHER

> argument. It can signal that there may be a

> problem with bias or discrimination, but you have

> to dig further to find additional evidence to make

> any claim.

>

> We had good debate in here until you came in. You

> are more than welcome to join in, but stop putting

> words in people's mouths - it is offensive.

> Constantly screaming highly random versions of "SO

> YOU THINK THIS" is tiresome and, yes, gets my back

> up. If you ask - nicely - for clarification, you

> will get it. If you jump up and down like a

> little child you will be treated accordingly.

>

>

> LondonMix Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > And here is the quote since you keep saying,

> I'm

> > not quoting you....

> >

> > Loz Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Blah Blah Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > And I wonder what percentage of crime

> > > (especially violent crime) is carried out by

> > men?

> > > There's

> > > > probably a correlation there Loz.

> > >

> > > And if you do the same exercise with

> ethnicity

> > in

> > > the US?

[LondonMix]

Also, when your very first post on the thread before anyone brought up stats is the below in response to the All Lives Matter question, it's hard to get that all of the subsequent talk about men etc was to prove that correlations don't prove anything even when they exist but that you are not specifically questioning the existence of racial bias in shootings stats per se (for which there is significant statistical data) just making a generic point about the difficulty in using statistics.

Asking if you were suggesting there is no proof or no actual racial bias in U.S. Police shootings or if you were suggesting that as other groups suffer disproportionately, All Lives matter was more appropriate isn't a leap of imagination...

You acknowledge it wasn't clear but have reacted in the extreme to being questioned (and everything I said directly to you was posed as a question regarding what you meant). It was not unreasonable to try to get at what it was that you were trying to say given you yourself say it was 'opaque and esoteric'. I think you are being overly sensitive and saying I'm harming the standing of the BLM which I don't belong to is churlish.

Also, your repeated assertion I was screaming and being loud is telling. I didn't use exclamation marks, caps, abusive language or insults when engaging with you. Yet me asking you to explain plainly what you were trying to say and questioning what it might be is me screaming at you and I'm the one unable to engage in debate....

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The percentage of people shot by cops that are

> male is higher than the percentage who identify as

> black.

>

> So why isn't it 'Male Lives Matter'?

[WorkingMummy]

Picking holes in BLM, saying it suits America more than the UK, or critiquing the agenda - to me, it just 100% misses the point.

Speaking as a privileged white woman, I consider myself to have zero right, zero place, to tell any minority group, or person, how to express their identity, or to vocalise their sense of injustice and oppression. Which is real. White people already dictate everything about the prevailing culture. We are represented by all the norms. We do not get to tell minorities how to express their own reaction to that.

And as a woman - I have a lot to say about women's lives mattering. And just because women are a bit better represented in positions of influence and power, less likely to be raped, less likely to be forced into marriage, less likely to suffer FGM in this country than say....Saudi Arabia, I'll be damned if I'm going to speak out less whenever I confront sexism or male domination here at home. Which is daily.

And if I started a movement here called - I don't know - female sexuality matters - and people criticised me for aping Saudi women's plight, I'd tell them, hell, to ....

[rendelharris]

WorkingMummy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Speaking as a privileged white woman, I consider

> myself to have zero right, zero place, to tell any

> minority group, or person, how to express their

> identity, or to vocalise their sense of injustice

> and oppression.

That is simply absurd. Nobody can critique any minority group's choice of protest if they're white? Let's take an extreme example, the Nation of Islam. That is a group through which some black people express their identity and vocalise their sense of injustice and oppression: it's also a group which is deeply antisemitic, expresses vehement hatred of LGBT people and advocates racial separation. Do you refuse to criticise those views as you're a privileged white woman?

There are many mountains to climb before we reach even a semblance of racial equality; liberal self-flagellation isn't going to help us on that journey.

[TheCat]

WorkingMummy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Picking holes in BLM, saying it suits America more

> than the UK, or critiquing the agenda - to me, it

> just 100% misses the point.

>

> Speaking as a privileged white woman, I consider

> myself to have zero right, zero place, to tell any

> minority group, or person, how to express their

> identity, or to vocalise their sense of injustice

> and oppression. Which is real. White people

> already dictate everything about the prevailing

> culture. We are represented by all the norms. We

> do not get to tell minorities how to express their

> own reaction to that.

>

> And as a woman - I have a lot to say about women's

> lives mattering. And just because women are a bit

> better represented in positions of influence and

> power, less likely to be raped, less likely to be

> forced into marriage, less likely to suffer FGM in

> this country than say....Saudi Arabia, I'll be

> damned if I'm going to speak out less whenever I

> confront sexism or male domination here at home.

> Which is daily.

>

> And if I started a movement here called - I don't

> know - female sexuality matters - and people

> criticised me for aping Saudi women's plight, I'd

> tell them, hell, to ....

So, to clarify, according to you, one must be the exact same gender, ethnicity, age and religion to be able to comment or express an opinion about someone else? So as I am not a woman, my opinions on anything to do with women are invalid?

Because heaven knows, I've never, ever heard a woman telling a man how to live his life.....

[LondonMix]

Rendell-- criticizing a groups views on other groups (ant-semitism, women etc) is not the same thing as saying you don't feel you have a right to criticise how said group 'expresses their identity, or to vocalise their sense of injustice and oppression'.

Your conflating two separate issues and given Working Mummy's position on the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia, almost certainly misinterpreting her position on this.

I really don't want to get into the issues in the UK as I am not well informed enough but my gut reaction to criticizing different members of the black diaspora for wanting to unify in a single movement and in so doing it broaden its focus to incorporate other civil rights issues beyond just shootings struck me as...odd. I'll leave it at that.

[rendelharris]

Do some black people express their identity and vocalise their sense of injustice and oppression through the Nation of Islam? Does the Nation of Islam advocate hate positions against other groups? If the answer to both of those is yes, does any person not have a right to criticise that group, no matter what their enthnicity? Yes, it's an extreme example, but WM specifically said that no white person has zero right, zero place, to criticise any way in which a minority person or group choose to express their identity or vocalise their sense of injustice or oppression.

"my gut reaction to criticizing different members of the black diaspora for wanting to unify in a single movement and in so doing it broaden its focus to incorporate other civil rights issues beyond just shootings struck me as...odd. I'll leave it at that."

Please don't leave it at that - you clearly imply that there's an element of racism in the criticism. If that's what you want to say, have the courage to say it rather than leave a coy little hint.

[miga]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> miga Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > I also agree with Loz, if I may paraphrase, that

> any broadly based social justice movement will

> > have inconsistencies and imperfections and

> logical flaws.

>

> Sort of, but not quite what I said. I was

> suggesting that BLM chooses its battles more

> carefully. Defending someone using a 5 year old as

> a human shield I think reduces the potency of

> their argument.

>

> But what you said I agree with as well.

That's why I said "paraphrase".

To be consistent and logical - the group would have to pick only the pure as driven snow cases, behave totally ethically and consistently and wait until all evidence was revealed about every case they protest before saying anything. Admirable as that would be - that's more how a law firm or a government inquiry works than a broad, decentralised social justice movement. It also means that nothing would get done. Some people in the BLM camp ran with the case you mentioned - I agree it weakens their case, but it's the nature of this kind of thing.

[LondonMix]

I think anyone has a right to criticize the nation of Islam for its anti-semitic views. I thought I made that clear but if not I'll say it again. I also think you can criticize any movement that tries to raise itself up at the expense or through the oppression of others.

I don't think its racist at all to question the BLM in the UK. I'm from the US so my threshold for calling something racist is pretty high. I think the comments about the UK movement are odd in that I don't understand why people feel that way and the explanations people have put forward don't really seem substantive. It kind of seems like people are annoyed by it more than anything else. To be fair, a lot of social media driven movements annoy me, particularly when fronted by 'passionate' (and oft ill-informed) young people so I'm guessing that's a big part of it. I don't know as I'm not following it closely though.

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Do some black people express their identity and

> vocalise their sense of injustice and oppression

> through the Nation of Islam? Does the Nation of

> Islam advocate hate positions against other

> groups? If the answer to both of those is yes,

> does any person not have a right to criticise that

> group, no matter what their enthnicity? Yes, it's

> an extreme example, but WM specifically said that

> no white person has zero right, zero place, to

> criticise any way in which a minority person or

> group choose to express their identity or vocalise

> their sense of injustice or oppression.

>

> "my gut reaction to criticizing different members

> of the black diaspora for wanting to unify in a

> single movement and in so doing it broaden its

> focus to incorporate other civil rights issues

> beyond just shootings struck me as...odd. I'll

> leave it at that."

>

> Please don't leave it at that - you clearly imply

> that there's an element of racism in the

> criticism. If that's what you want to say, have

> the courage to say it rather than leave a coy

> little hint.

[DaveR]

"And just because women are a bit better represented in positions of influence and power, less likely to be raped, less likely to be forced into marriage, less likely to suffer FGM in this country than say....Saudi Arabia"

A bit better? Were you trying to prove your own point by saying something ridiculous, on the basis that you are immune from criticism because you are 'vocalising your sense of injustice and oppression'?

"I really don't want to get into the issues in the UK as I am not well informed enough"

I think that's evident - you should stick with your instincts.

[LondonMix]

Anyway, I've understood the broader point that WorkingMummy was trying to make as akin to what the BLM activist Jesse Williams stated in his highly publicized (in the US) speech. He was specifically referencing criticism of the Black Lives Matter 'slogan' and the All Lives Matter response:

"And let?s get a couple things straight, just a little sidenote ? the burden of the brutalized is not to comfort the bystander.That?s not our job, alright ? stop with all that. If you have a critique for the resistance, for our resistance, then you better have an established record of critique of our oppression. If you have no interest, if you have no interest in equal rights for black people then do not make suggestions to those who do. Sit down."

[LondonMix]

DaveR Wrote:

>

> I think that's evident - you should stick with

> your instincts.

Cross posted with DaveR--

Evident because I found it odd? So far the most consistent criticism has been that people find it 'lazy'. That just strikes me as an odd criticism of a social justice movement. Perhaps its entirely apt.

[LondonMix]

I feel like this is such an emotive issue its hard to make my point clear without offending people but I think its important to be clear. I don't think anyone who has been posting is anything close to racist.

Often times, the underlying issue for social justice groups, whoever they are, is that they don?t feel their lives or their suffering is valued or assessed the same as those with more privilege and consequently they create forums in which to validate themselves and draw strength. Places where they are understood and believed.

The sense of not being as real was included in the speech I quoted before by Williams:

?The thing is though? the thing is that just because we?re magic doesn?t mean we?re not real.?

It may seem ludicrous that someone would need to remind society they are a real person but a study reported this year in the Washing Post (a conservative US broadsheet) underlies how necessary this can be:

?African Americans are routinely under-treated for their pain compared with whites, according to research. A study released Monday sheds some disturbing light on why that might be the case. Researchers at the University of Virginia quizzed white medical students and residents to see how many believed inaccurate and at times "fantastical" differences about the two races -- for example, that blacks have less sensitive nerve endings than whites or that black people's blood coagulates more quickly. They found that fully half thought at least one of the false statements presented was possibly, probably or definitely true. Moreover, those who held false beliefs often rated black patients' pain as lower than that of white patients and made less appropriate recommendations about how they should be treated.?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/04/04/do-blacks-feel-less-pain-than-whites-their-doctors-may-think-so/

If you read the entire article, you?ll see this isn?t based on an isolated study but multiple studies at different institutions. There are similar studies in the UK that also show under treatment of pain in various minority ethnic groups.

It is very easy to dismiss other people?s view about the difficulties they face and the sense of shared identity they perceive. I wouldn?t personally have believed the figures could be so disturbingly high among educated people who I am sure are not racist and don?t even recognize the nature of their prejudice.

While to outsiders it may be tempting to critique the nature of social justice groups' identity politics, why the feel kinship with certain others (in other countries), why they aren?t more inclusive, how legitimate their grievances are etc real prejudice can be invisible to those on the outside and so empathy should be the first basic framework we use without substantive reasons for a different stance after cautious and careful assessment.

I?m still in the office due to all the contributions today so I need to get back to work?

[Loz]

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I did not scream loudly at you and I don't need

> your condescending invitation to participate on

> the forum.

You came in with a very attacking post, came to a ridiculous conclusion and accused me of saying things I didn't say, with the added pompous 'educate yourself' twaddle. Not to mention your attempt to stifle debate with your 'stop criticizing something you don't actually know much about' demand. And still you wonder why you got a major pushback to your bolshiness?

Many times I suggested you just ask nicely for a clarification and when you finally did I gave it to you.

Anyway, enough. You have your clarification and your last few posts have been an improvement.

[JoeLeg]

Your many good points notwithstanding Loz, you can be an arrogant so-and-so at times.

" your last few posts have been an improvement."

Way to come off like a sanctimonious schoolteacher...

[Loz]

miga Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> > miga Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> > > I also agree with Loz, if I may paraphrase, that any broadly based social justice movement will

> > > have inconsistencies and imperfections and logical flaws.

> >

> > Sort of, but not quite what I said. I was suggesting that BLM chooses its battles more

> > carefully. Defending someone using a 5 year old as a human shield I think reduces the potency of

> > their argument.

> >

> > But what you said I agree with as well.

>

> That's why I said "paraphrase".

>

> To be consistent and logical - the group would have to pick only the pure as driven snow cases,

> behave totally ethically and consistently and wait until all evidence was revealed about every case

> they protest before saying anything. Admirable as that would be - that's more how a law firm or a

> government inquiry works than a broad, decentralised social justice movement. It also

> means that nothing would get done. Some people in the BLM camp ran with the case you mentioned - I

> agree it weakens their case, but it's the nature of this kind of thing.

Certainly not just the 'perfect' cases, but certainly try to avoid the completely indefensible. BLM's has many critics - why give them ammunition? (Sorry, not the best phrase to use in the circumstances, but can't think of a suitable replacement.) It's a problem shared by many broad based movements - a lack of focus and the inability to spot the winnable battles.

[Loz]

JoeLeg Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Your many good points notwithstanding Loz, you can

> be an arrogant so-and-so at times.

>

> " your last few posts have been an improvement."

>

> Way to come off like a sanctimonious schoolteacher...

Sorry - LM got right up my nose (as you might have noticed)... so that was just a little dig, trying to return the compliment. :))

[LondonMix]

I don't think I attacked you, I asked you questions (without insulting you). You think your admittedly opaque questions weren't deserving of pointed questioning. Let's at this point just agree to disagree as neither of us are likely to shift and in the grander scheme of things, it's hardly worth banging on about.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LondonMix Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I did not scream loudly at you and I don't need

> > your condescending invitation to participate on

> > the forum.

>

> You came in with a very attacking post, came to a

> ridiculous conclusion and accused me of saying

> things I didn't say, with the added pompous

> 'educate yourself' twaddle. Not to mention your

> attempt to stifle debate with your 'stop

> criticizing something you don't actually know much

> about' demand. And still you wonder why you got a

> major pushback to your bolshiness?

>

> Many times I suggested you just ask nicely for a

> clarification and when you finally did I gave it

> to you.

>

> Anyway, enough. You have your clarification and

> your last few posts have been an improvement.

[Otta]

I suggest you two just ignore each other for a bit, because this is getting slightly personal, and Loz you're not covering yourself in glory as JoeLeg points out (and more often than not I'm a fan of yours).

[Loz]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I suggest you two just ignore each other for a bit, because this is getting slightly personal,

> and Loz you're not covering yourself in glory as JoeLeg points out (and more often than not I'm a

> fan of yours).

Fair point. LM is just dragging me down.

[LondonMix]

As previous post indicated, I agree this needs to stop. Neither the tone nor the language are anything I find appropriate or acceptable.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I suggest you two just ignore each other for a

> bit, because this is getting slightly personal,

> and Loz you're not covering yourself in glory as

> JoeLeg points out (and more often than not I'm a

> fan of yours).

[BrandNewGuy]

One of my regular podcasts has an excellent episode this week discussing race, violence and BLM in the USA. Well worth your time:

https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/racism-and-violence-in-america

[red devil]