The Student Room Group

White Lives Matter

Scroll to see replies

Original post by BeastOfSyracuse
I don't think using stereotypical gifs/images of black people really helps in a discussion about racism.

In fact, why are so many gifs based on stereotypical, exaggerated black reactions and emotions? There's something a bit exploitative about it


Because these gifs are funny and often express how posters feel at that point.
Original post by kimi1kimi2kimi3
Why do people think police brutality is only an issue for black people? According to the American Bureau of Justice, from 2003 to 2006 (most recent available) 1,134 white people were victims of arrest-related deaths in the US compared to 834 blacks (http://www.bjs.gov/content/dcrp/tables/dcst06let3.pdf). Police brutality is not a white vs. black issue, it is a law enforcement vs. civilian issue. I don't claim to know about issues of race in the UK, but I do know quite a bit about these issues in the US. It's not only blacks that are getting harassed, beaten and killed by police - it's everyone across the spectrum of every ethnicity.

Imagine the impact we could make if we all banded together as CITIZENS, regardless of color, and addressed the problem as a united front against law enforcement's ******** ego-driven disregard for human life.


Original post by Attempt
LOL, still no reply.


The ACLU probably didn't give him the next cue card.


You guys ever heard of percentages?
Original post by Captain Haddock
You guys ever heard of percentages?




Yes we have.

And according to the FBI and the department of justice, black people account for only 13% of the population of America, yet account for over 49% of the homicides, and gang related incarcerations.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Attempt
Yes we have.

And according to the FBI and the department of justice, black people account for only 13% of the population of America, yet account for over 49% of the homicides, and gang related incarcerations.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf

Here are some more statistics you probably wont like

In 2010, the U.S. Sentencing Commission reported that African Americans receive 10% longer sentences than whites through the federal system for the same crimes.

African-Americans comprise only 13% of the U.S. population and 14% of the monthly drug users, but are 37% of the people arrested for drug-related offenses in America

Studies show that police are more likely to pull over and frisk blacks or Latinos than whites. In New York City, 80% of the stops made were blacks and Latinos, and 85% of those people were frisked, compared to a mere 8% of white people stopped.

After being arrested, African-Americans are 33% more likely than whites to be detained while facing a felony trial in New York.
Original post by Attempt
Yes we have.

And according to the FBI and the department of justice, black people account for only 13% of the population of America, yet account for over 49% of the homicides, and gang related incarcerations.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf


So you know how percentages work, and yet you still think comparing the absolute figures for arrest related deaths of blacks and whites is somehow valid?
Original post by Mentally
Here are some more statistics you probably wont like

In 2010, the U.S. Sentencing Commission reported that African Americans receive 10% longer sentences than whites through the federal system for the same crimes.

African-Americans comprise only 13% of the U.S. population and 14% of the monthly drug users, but are 37% of the people arrested for drug-related offenses in America

Studies show that police are more likely to pull over and frisk blacks or Latinos than whites. In New York City, 80% of the stops made were blacks and Latinos, and 85% of those people were frisked, compared to a mere 8% of white people stopped.

After being arrested, African-Americans are 33% more likely than whites to be detained while facing a felony trial in New York.




The first statistic you mentioned was completely debunked because it doesn't take into account repeated offenders and offences by criminals. When it does, that statistic disappears.

The second one is because African americans are involved in wider scale gang related drug smuggling activities, and constitute 45% of all gang related offences in America. If anything this is a point against black people.

The last 2 are either fradulent statistcs backed by black supremacists or previously debunked ones.

Unlike you, I'll actually produce more stats that are actually backed by the FBI and the CIA.


FACT: From 2011 to 2013, 38.5 per cent of people arrested for murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were black. This figure is three times higher than the 13% black population figure. When you account for the fact that black males aged 15-34, who account for around 3% of the population, are responsible for the vast majority of these crimes, the figures are even more staggering.





FACT: Despite the fact that black people commit an equal or greater number of violent crimes than whites, whites are almost TWICE as likely to be killed by police officers.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/aug/21/michael-medved/talk-show-host-police-kill-more-whites-blacks/




FACT: Despite being outnumbered by whites five to one, blacks commit eight times more crimes against whites than vice-versa, according to FBI statistics from 2007. A black male is 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse. These figures also show that interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white.
Original post by Captain Haddock
So you know how percentages work, and yet you still think comparing the absolute figures for arrest related deaths of blacks and whites is somehow valid?




Where did I do that?
Reply 127
Original post by darkvibes
You're stupid, the UK wont be the fastest growing economy in the western without the skilled immigrants that come into the UK and work in both the service and goods sector. Without them the productive potential of the country would be much lower. You clearly dont know anything about economics, this is basic common knowledge.

Read the context you fool, i said that because the guy i replied to said the UK had open borders.

Dont quote me with your bigoted views, you come here to have a stab at muslims when its completely irrelevant.


Oh calm down, you'll have a brain aneurysm. I'll quote who I want.

The UK economy, according to wikipedia is at $2.853 trillion and grew at 2.3% in 2015. 2.3% of $2.853 trillion is $65b. Net migration into the UK in 2015 was 323,000.

That means that each migrant would have to have contributed $202,941 (£142,720) per capita/person to create just that surplus of 2.3% ($65b), ignoring the other $2.8 trillion produced to reach 'break even' and prevent a recession.

Very obviously this is not the case. Let's be incredibly generous and say that each migrant contributes $41,787 to the UK economy, which is the UK population's average. 323,000 x $41,787 = $13,497,201,000 = $13 billion.

$13,497,201,000 (maximum potential economic contribution of every migrant in 2015) is just 0.473% of $2.853,000,000,000 (total 2015 British GDP)

So at the very maximum under this incredibly generous assumption we could claim that migration into the UK in 2015 contributed to only 0.5% of total British GDP. In reality we know that migrants don't contribute anywhere near $41,787 per person and as such that percentage, truthfully, is even smaller.

Immigration is hardly the mighty engine of the British economy and you trying to slander me won't make it true. I'm certainly not a bigot and where did I even mention Islam or Muslims in my previous post?
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Attempt
Where did I do that?


Well, you didn't make the argument, but you had your tongue up the ass of the guy who did.
Original post by Captain Haddock
Well, you didn't make the argument, but you had your tongue up the ass of the guy who did.




I hope you realise that you just made yourself look like an idiot right?
Original post by Roofas
Oh calm down, you'll have a brain aneurysm. I'll quote who I want.

The UK economy, according to wikipedia is at $2.853 trillion and grew at 2.3% in 2015. 2.3% of $2.853 trillion is $65b. Net migration into the UK in 2015 was 323,000.

That means that each migrant would have to have contributed $202,941 (£142,720) per capita/person to create just that surplus of 2.3% ($65b), ignoring the other $2.8 trillion produced to reach 'break even' and prevent a recession.

Very obviously this is not the case. Let's be incredibly generous and say that each migrant contributes $41,787 to the UK economy, which is the UK population's average. 323,000 x $41,787 = $13,497,201,000 = $13 billion.

$13,497,201,000 (maximum potential economic contribution of every migrant in 2015) is just 0.473% of $2.853,000,000,000 (total 2015 British GDP)

So at the very maximum under this incredibly generous assumption we could claim that migration into the UK in 2015 contributed to only 0.5% of total British GDP. In reality we know that migrants don't contribute anywhere near $41,787 per person and as such that percentage, truthfully, is even smaller.

Immigration is hardly the mighty engine of the British economy and you trying to slander me won't make it true. I'm certainly not a bigot and where did I even mention Islam or Muslims in my previous post?




I agree with a lot of what you just said my friend, but my question here is how you arrived at a $41,787 figure per immigrant?
Original post by Attempt
Where did I do that?


Original post by Attempt


FACT: Despite the fact that black people commit an equal or greater number of violent crimes than whites, whites are almost TWICE as likely to be killed by police officers.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/aug/21/michael-medved/talk-show-host-police-kill-more-whites-blacks/

.


You also did it here, you mug. Maybe you should read the article before you post.

"Rather than comparing the raw numbers, you can look at the likelihood that a person will die due to "legal intervention" in the same way you might look at the chance a person will die in a car accident or a disease like lung cancer. When you do that, the numbers flip.

A 2002 study in the American Journal of Public Health found that the death rate due to legal intervention was more than three times higher for blacks than for whites in the period from 1988 to 1997."
Original post by Mentally
Here are some more statistics you probably wont like

In 2010, the U.S. Sentencing Commission reported that African Americans receive 10% longer sentences than whites through the federal system for the same crimes.

After being arrested, African-Americans are 33% more likely than whites to be detained while facing a felony trial in New York.


When you've committed a crime, do you know what improves your chances of getting cut loose on your own recognizance until your trial and also improves your chance of getting a relatively short sentence if you are convicted? A JOB. I'll just sit here and wait for the statistics you will surely be citing to bolster some claim about how black people can't get hired and if they do, it's for less money or they get fired for the same things white people get away with . . . The BLM movement is not going to effect any positive change in the way society views and treats black people. In fact, quite the opposite. Does it make people want to treat black people with more respect and dignity when those involved with the Black Lives Matter movement publicly defecate on the American Flag, riot and destroy their own cities, and call "open season on crackers"? I think not. What gets you treated with dignity and respect in this world is BEING DIGNIFIED AND RESPECTFUL.
Original post by Captain Haddock
You also did it here, you mug. Maybe you should read the article before you post.

"Rather than comparing the raw numbers, you can look at the likelihood that a person will die due to "legal intervention" in the same way you might look at the chance a person will die in a car accident or a disease like lung cancer. When you do that, the numbers flip.

A 2002 study in the American Journal of Public Health found that the death rate due to legal intervention was more than three times higher for blacks than for whites in the period from 1988 to 1997."


I guess you also missed the part where my point is proven with this simple quote, you tosser.



"The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that in 2004, state courts had over 1 million felony convictions. Of those, 59 percent were committed by whites and 38 percent by blacks. But when you factor in the population of whites and blacks, the felony rates stand at 330 per 100,000 for whites and 1,178 per 100,000 for blacks. That’s more than a three-fold difference."
Original post by Wired_1800
Because these gifs are funny and often express how posters feel at that point.


I suppose the point I'm getting at is that I feel these gifs are often based on stereotyped perceptions of black people's behaviour (that it is exaggerated, outlandish, snippy etc) that themselves come from racism and systemic inequality; the media has played up to these stereotypes which provides a solid output of gifs

I think those gifs are almost like an updated version of this cartoon below; it's outrageously racist (and from the 1930s I think) but basically you are seeing all the elements of behaviour that you see in the gifs

[video="youtube;sls5H4xVHys"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sls5H4xVHys[/video]
Original post by The_Last_Melon
White lives matter because people say you can't even be racist against us despite being the most tolerant people in the world to other races except for maybe the Chinese and Thai people. So because we are so tolerant that excuses you to abuse us? I don't think so.


generic race bait thread is generic
Reply 136
Original post by Attempt
I agree with a lot of what you just said my friend, but my question here is how you arrived at a $41,787 figure per immigrant?


Well that figure is the value of British GDP per capita. This is the total value of the British economy in one year divided by the population, giving a sort of idea of the rough contribution of each citizen to the economy. At least that's the way I understand it, I'm not an economist.

So all I did was calculate using that $41,787 value as a guide for what each immigrant would contribute also. While there are lots of skilled migrants there are also many on benefits and who work picking apples so I personally doubt it is an appropriate figure myself. I would imagine it's a fair bit lower but I doubt they keep real statistics regarding this matter.
Original post by Attempt
I guess you also missed the part where my point is proven with this simple quote, you tosser.



"The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that in 2004, state courts had over 1 million felony convictions. Of those, 59 percent were committed by whites and 38 percent by blacks. But when you factor in the population of whites and blacks, the felony rates stand at 330 per 100,000 for whites and 1,178 per 100,000 for blacks. That’s more than a three-fold difference."


... No.

Here's what happened. You said that whites are twice as likely to be killed by police. You posted this article as proof. Same article actually says that while the raw numbers for police deaths are roughly twice as high for white people, the likelihood is three times higher for blacks. Don't start talking about felony rates, because that's not what we're talking about.
Original post by Captain Haddock
... No.

Here's what happened. You said that whites are twice as likely to be killed by police. You posted this article as proof. Same article actually says that while the raw numbers for police deaths are roughly twice as high for white people, the likelihood is three times higher for blacks. Don't start talking about felony rates, because that's not what we're talking about.


From 1988 - 1997 you stupid moron.

The reasons for that happening during those years is not mentioned anywhere on the FBI's official website, the DOJ, the CIA. Nothing. So nothing meaningful can be made from that stat.

BLM movement started around 2013/2014.

Meaning your point is inherently flawed.
Original post by BeastOfSyracuse
I suppose the point I'm getting at is that I feel these gifs are often based on stereotyped perceptions of black people's behaviour (that it is exaggerated, outlandish, snippy etc) that themselves come from racism and systemic inequality; the media has played up to these stereotypes which provides a solid output of gifs

I think those gifs are almost like an updated version of this cartoon below; it's outrageously racist (and from the 1930s I think) but basically you are seeing all the elements of behaviour that you see in the gifs

[video="youtube;sls5H4xVHys"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sls5H4xVHys[/video]


I don't think that current gifs using black people originates from a systemic racist behaviour, which existed in previous years. These gifs are influenced by memes that are used in many ways and to express many emotions or situations.

The reason that I used Russell Westbrook was because the reporter asked a really weird question that his response was classic. The poster asked a similar sort of question and my reaction (when I read it) was the same with Westbrook. Hence, the gif.

If you feel that Russell Westbrook's gif is influenced by a racist stereotype that people are unknowingly living up to, then here are others from non-black people.





Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending