Political Correctness

[Tornado]

https://deadline.com/2021/02/gina-c...piro-hits-back-cancel-culture-1234692971/amp/


In case there was any benefit of the doubt to still give her.

 

[Scaff]

https://deadline.com/2021/02/gina-c...piro-hits-back-cancel-culture-1234692971/amp/


In case there was any benefit of the doubt to still give her.

Oh what a shocking surprise!

 

[Danoff]

I wonder if any Nazi sympathizers complained (after Hitler's fall and the subsequent German national embarrassment of Nazi support) that they were being treated like the Jews by being shunned and feeling disgraced over their support for Hitler.

 

[UKMikey]

https://deadline.com/2021/02/gina-c...piro-hits-back-cancel-culture-1234692971/amp/


In case there was any benefit of the doubt to still give her.

 

[McLaren]

https://deadline.com/2021/02/gina-c...piro-hits-back-cancel-culture-1234692971/amp/


In case there was any benefit of the doubt to still give her.

That's awfully nice of Ben Shapiro to let Gina display that not only is her acting lacking refinement, but likely so are her writing & directing skills.

 

[UKMikey]

That's awfully nice of Ben Shapiro to let Gina display that not only is her acting lacking refinement, but likely so are her writing & directing skills.

I suspect Republican mindshare, not artistic quality, is his primary focus as producer.

 

[ryzno]

You should absolutely be able to punch a Nazi, preferably blindside them too so they do not-see it coming.

I know y'all know what he meant. SMH
Not every Trump supporter is a Nazi.
But hey call him a Nazi anyways just so you can punch him.

Lefties and TDS people really are the delusional ones.
I don't recall a viral video of anyone saying they were going to kill themselves cause Biden won.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Lefties and TDS people really are the delusional ones.
I don't recall a viral video of anyone saying they were going to kill themselves cause Biden won.

I haven't either, but I do recall hearing something about some people storming the Capitol.

 

[ryzno]

I haven't either, but I do recall hearing something about some people storming the Capitol.

I recall riots too. Interesting.
Literally history repeating itself.
Just with a different group of people.

 

[ryzno]

Bias test, what's y'alls first impression of this person?
https://www.wsbtv.com/news/trending...-will-remain-jail/4CARCOWX3ZDU5KRZB4ZU3IHY4I/

 

[McLaren]

Lefties and TDS people really are the delusional ones.

And you wonder why you repeatedly get portrayed as a Trump supporter by others here?

 

[ryzno]

And you wonder why you repeatedly get portrayed as a Trump supporter by others here?

I did support him and went through a few years of being called numerous things I'm not.
I'm still a little salty about it.

You've changed a little yourself.

 

[Scaff]

I know y'all know what he meant. SMH
Not every Trump supporter is a Nazi.
But hey call him a Nazi anyways just so you can punch him.

Not every Trump voter is a Nazi, but pretty much every Nazi voted for Trump.

Or did you miss the clothing celebrating Nazis at the Capitol?

Lefties and TDS people really are the delusional ones.
I don't recall a viral video of anyone saying they were going to kill themselves cause Biden won.

No they actually killed a police officer instead, posted viral videos saying they were going to kill numerous people and literally tried to overthrow the government!

I recall riots too. Interesting.
Literally history repeating itself.
Just with a different group of people.

Utter and complete nonsense.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Because I don't accept that non whites are the majority offenders given their overwhelming minority and wonder what interest you'd have in drawing such an inference.

You don't see the contradiction here? Where is your evidence for this?

Afro-Caribbeans are a minority in London yet make up the majority of knife crime offenders, yet according to your logic this cannot possibly be the case.

You're missing my point. I understand how representative samples work but don't see how they conclusively prove that South Asians are more likely to sexually exploit children. See my following paragraph.

And yet this doesn't address that a difference in prevalence doesn't take into account the possibility that people of colour are being disproportionately investigated and convicted.

I'm trying to show you that studies have limitations, which authors usually acknowledge. You're talking about one limitation in particular, and saying that because of that we'll never be able to conclude over/under representation. I've given you an analogy that shows in Medicine we can offer conclusions with a similar limitation.

Neither does this. As I understand it the margin of error would decrease the more crime was detected and arrests made but we have no way of knowing whether this is a majority or even a representative sample of all cases as the report points out that a large proportion of crimes of this nature go undetected.

Again you're looking for a perfect study and one that is unlikely to ever exist.

Let's use an analogy with COVID-19.

We can safely conclude that BAME individuals are more at risk of adverse outcomes than white people in the UK. We know that we haven't included all positive cases of COVID-19, and there might be a multitude of factors causing under/over reporting from each cohort, but we can still reach a valid conclusion.

But it's good that such an erudite and unbiased source as Dan Hidges from the Mail On Sunday has uncovered the obvious whitewash at the Home Office. Glad we've cleared that up. /s

Did his sources lie to him?

*sigh*

That's only a question if you refuse to look outside the box you've already built yourself into. The entire point of my last post is that the problem may not lie with institutions at all; rather with individuals who have scared themselves into inaction by convincing themselves of the existence of the "political correctness" boogeyman.



Huge advancements in communication that enabled like-minded people to build echo chambers and stir each other up much faster and easier than ever before? This was also already addressed in my previous posts.

Echo chambers saying what exactly? This makes sense when talking about the Twittersphere and how people work themselves up to convince themselves of political correctness where it doesn't exist but I don't think those are the people who would then bow to pressure to not offend certain communities. You seem to suggest that these echo chambers are comprised of bigots, but the people who are concerned enough to not act seem the opposite of bigots.

Seriously, once you've made up your mind about something, you just cannot entertain any other possibilities, can you? You're approaching this, as you are wont to do, as if everybody else has to start from the same basic assumptions you've started from. The existence of "political correctness" at an institutional level isn't established fact. You keep treating my responses to you as if they must start from that assumption. I'm trying to tell you that assumption isn't required.

With the Jay report it found that individuals didn't act both of their own volition and because of pressure from management.

I'm admittedly only a very casual observer in most of this thread, but this bolded part stuck out to me. You just admitted that it's not only Black people that engage in this activity, but you seem to always specifically mention the Black populace, with little acknowledgement of any other groups that may/may not be involved. I've also noticed you seem to refer to some of these folks by their country of origin fairly often, rather than referring to them as fellow brits or Londoners.

You seem to be singiling out a particular demographic, even though it is not the only involved demographic by your own admittance. Why is that? And why is it that you say that black youths are the ones who need attention, with (as far as I've been able to notice) little-to-no mention of other parties?

I was asked to explain why I think ethnicity are markers for behaviour. I then talked about the Mirpur community and grooming offences and the black population and knife crime. I refer to them by ethnic group because of the their heightened association with these problems, in the same way we can talk about the white population and general child sexual abuse offences or Tay-Sachs and the Jewish population. In this context, talking about Londoners is pretty vague and non-specific.

With gangs in particular it is a problem for most communities in Britain, but especially so with the Black-Caribbean because of various factors.

It's even odder when you take into account the focus on London alone as well, given that knife-crime and gang violence is not limited to London, and as soon as you include the whole of England and Whales (Scotland reports crime figures differently due to devolved government differences) the majority (even accounting for demographic differences becomes white!

Then again he does the exact same by focusing only on grooming gangs, which allows the focus to be on Asian males, when you include all forms of sexual abuse involving those underage it once again moves in the total opposite direction.

It's almost as if an agenda is at play...

I think you need to understand proportionality when you quote these statistics. The majority of knife crime being committed by white individuals shouldn't come as a surprise when the majority of the country is white.

Does it? Is their community London? Is it black people? Is it black people with ancestry in the Caribbean? What exactly is their community? And are they more likely to perpetuate violence against people that look like them, or are from where they're from? Is that because of ethnicity?

Hard to define. I listen to a few urban radio stations based in London and they frequently have adverts that specifically use the term "black community" (a lot of listeners belong to that demographic). The latest is a targetted advert saying how BAME individuals should take the COVID-19 vaccine.

Let me ask you... is there such a thing as the white community?

Yes, I'd say so. Same as there's a Coptic community in Egypt, or an ex-pat community in Spain.

Since you love these breakdowns, why do you think Black African students do better than Black Caribbean students?

Mix of things probably. The factors that attract black-Caribbean youths towards gangs can take them away from schools. More discipline may be a factor, which could stem from a lack of a father figure. More drive to succeed academically because of the culture could be another.

So shouldn't you be going after gang culture rather than anything to do with black-Caribbean people? I mean, I presume that gang culture is bad for everyone, regardless of skin color or ancestral lineage.

Yes you should, in a focussed approach. While in London it would be black/non Indian Asian, in Glasgow it would be white youths.

...or... anyone? When you say this, you're implying that there is something important about the characteristic you highlight... "black-caribbean" that attracts someone to join a gang. Wait, are we getting back into correlation and causation again?

You want an approach that works. Not having a father figure is more of a problem with the black rather than Asian community, so addressing that would yield better results.

What if a Chinese kid might join a gang? Can we help that kid? How about we don't target programs at specific ethnic groups and instead just try to address the actual problem - which is gangs (according to you).

Wouldn't that be a waste of resources?

Well I'm glad you're re-evaluating your beliefs.

It's not just limited to intelligence. I'd say it has on the other debates like Islam and political correctness too.

For the record, I don't think that there is any evidence that your particular ethnicity or genetic ancestry makes it impossible for you to study anything at all, and I think that's true of me too.

That's not to say that I don't have intellectual aptitudes (and you as well). I'm not sure where all of those aptitudes come from. It may be early cognitive pathway development, or perhaps there is a genetic component. I honestly do not know. But if you have a particular intellectual aptitude or interest, there's no reason to think that if you look different than those around you, that you shouldn't follow, or can't follow, that particular aptitude or interest.

Yeah, it's not that I blame it for my perceived lack of ability. I just wonder if it has influenced it at all.

 

[Scaff]

I think you need to understand proportionality when you quote these statistics. The majority of knife crime being committed by white individuals shouldn't come as a surprise when the majority of the country is white.

I’m aware of it, that why I pointed it out.

It took me doing that for you to even acknowledge it.

Your talking points have shared those of the right-wing press however, in only focusing on one group.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I’m aware of it, that why I pointed it out.

It took me doing that for you to even acknowledge it.

Your talking points have shared those of the right-wing press however, in only focusing on one group.

I don't see your point then?

If they're under-represented, what does that mean?

 

[UKMikey]

You don't see the contradiction here? Where is your evidence for this?

Afro-Caribbeans are a minority in London yet make up the majority of knife crime offenders, yet according to your logic this cannot possibly be the case.

I don't remember talking about knife crime. The discussion was about Asians and child sexual exploitation. As for logic, it sounds like you're trying to argue that people of colour are more likely to be criminals which I can't accept no matter how much of a contradiction you think it is. Your whole line of reasoning seems pretty suspect and I'm frankly sick of dredging this argument up every few days to go round in circles. This is why I don't like getting into conversations with you.

If you're trying to make the argument that black gang members are more involved in knife crime because of their economic circumstances, I'm not sure how this applies to Pakistanis whose economic circumstances are different. To mention both groups as part of the same argument when all they have in common is non-white skin is also pretty suspect.

I'm trying to show you that studies have limitations, which authors usually acknowledge. You're talking about one limitation in particular, and saying that because of that we'll never be able to conclude over/under representation. I've given you an analogy that shows in Medicine we can offer conclusions with a similar limitation.

This is criminal behaviour, not medicine. If you're using arrest records to conclude that ethnic groups are more likely to be paedophiles despite the conclusion of the Home Office study then I can only conclude as others have on this thread that you have a particular agenda against that group of people for some reason.

Again you're looking for a perfect study and one that is unlikely to ever exist.

I'm not looking for a perfect study but am making the point that the margin of error is much larger in a case where relatively few people are being arrested.

Did his sources lie to him?

It's the Mail on Sunday. We don't even know whether he quoted his sources verbatim. Is Dr Cockbain lying when she points out how misleading the op-ed is or details racists lapping it up? More evidence for an agenda as I have no interest in finding common ground with white supremacists.

 

[Scaff]

I don't see your point then?

If they're under-represented, what does that mean?

The point is, and it’s blindingly obvious, is that you focus on the issue with relation to only one group.

You obsession is not with a way to resolve the issue, but with assigning the issue to one group based on race.

Nothing at all in your posting history shows otherwise.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I don't remember talking about knife crime. The discussion was about Asians and child sexual exploitation. As for logic, it sounds like you're trying to argue that people of colour are more likely to be criminals which I can't accept no matter how much of a contradiction you think it is. Your whole line of reasoning seems pretty suspect and I'm frankly sick of dredging this argument every few days to go round in circles. This is why I don't like getting into conversations with you.

I'm not sure what you're not understanding. You have no problem accepting that white people make up the majority of group CSE offenders because they are a sizeable majority. Where is your evidence to come to this conclusion? The use of knife crime statistics is to show that just because one group is a majority, it doesn't necessarily follow that they will be the majority offenders, something which you have accepted with regards to group CSE.

This is criminal behaviour, not medicine. If you're using arrest records to conclude that ethnic groups are more likely to be paedophiles despite the conclusion of the Home Office study then I can only conclude as others have on this thread that you have a particular agenda against that group of people for some reason.

Sociology isn't my area so I don't know how they determine statistical power in drawing certain conclusions.

Is Dr Cockbain lying when she disagrees with the op-ed or details racists lapping it up? More evidence for an agenda.

Where does she go into why she disagrees with the op-ed?

And is this the same Dr Cockbain who wrote an article whose headline is wrong and misleading?

The point is, and it’s blindingly obvious, is that you focus on the issue with relation to only one group.

You obsession is not with a way to resolve the issue, but with assigning the issue to one group based on race.

Nothing at all in your posting history shows otherwise.

We need to work the problem.

The majority of knife crime is committed by white people, so we need to put resources into that.

However it is more of a problem with black/non-Indian Asian people per capita so we need to figure out why this is and put resources into that.

Using COVID-19 as an analogy again, it's like saying white people are killed more but going "lalalala I'm not listening" when talking about BAME being more likely to be killed.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Yawn.

So I've looked into the link you cited and the studies within.

One red flag with one of the studies is that

"It was also not possible, for example, to test whether S&S was associated with knife crime for this reason."

Fair enough, since the police don't record that type of violence. However a big problem is that this is comparing increased amounts of S&S to lower amounts of S&S, rather than no amount of S&S. It's therefore presumptive of the authors to say that the deterrent effect of S&S is "likely to be small, at best".

There is also contradictory data from New York, although how applicable that is to London is questionable.

 

[Famine]

Not every Trump voter is a Nazi, but pretty much every Nazi voted for Trump.

Or did you miss the clothing celebrating Nazis at the Capitol?

 

[Scaff]

The majority of knife crime is committed by white people, so we need to put resources into that.

However it is more of a problem with black/Asian people per capita so we need to figure out why this is and put resources into that.

And what if the reasons are grounded in the same thing? Socio-economic issues that exist regardless of race, which will be missed if you focus just on one factor, which is once again what you have repeatedly been doing!

It's also not actually clear if it is a problem per head of capita for any particular race. data shows that 38% of knife crime offenders were non-whites under 25, in 2017. Now while demographics show that 80% of the population (in 2011) were white, that covers all age groups, and with the median age for white British being higher than any other group, that figure is significantly skewed. Account for that difference and you have a lot closer match, certainly enough to call the claim that non-whites are over-represented into doubht.

 

[UKMikey]

I'm not sure what you're not understanding. You have no problem accepting that white people make up the majority of group CSE offenders because they are a sizeable majority. Where is your evidence to come to this conclusion? The use of knife crime statistics is to show that just because one group is a majority, it doesn't necessarily follow that they will be the majority offenders, something which you have accepted with regards to group CSE.

For it not to follow you'd have to provide compelling evidence that there is something about South Asians that isn't present in the psychological make up of white people which makes them more likely to exploit children sexually. Nobody is looking to prove this here except you.

Where does she go into why she disagrees with the op-ed?

And is this the same Dr Cockbain who wrote an article whose headline is wrong and misleading?

You haven't cited anything to support this opinion. You just linked to the article perhaps hoping that everyone else would agree that grooming gangs is a purely Muslim problem.

 

[HenrySwanson]

And what if the reasons are grounded in the same thing? Socio-economic issues that exist regardless of race, which will be missed if you focus just on one factor, which is once again what you have repeatedly been doing!

It's also not actually clear if it is a problem per head of capita for any particular race. data shows that 38% of knife crime offenders were non-whites under 25, in 2017. Now while demographics show that 80% of the population (in 2011) were white, that covers all age groups, and with the median age for white British being higher than any other group, that figure is significantly skewed. Account for that difference and you have a lot closer match, certainly enough to call the claim that non-whites are over-represented into doubht.

The median age of white British being higher means that it is skewed....so that....whites may make up a more substantial proportion of under 25s?

For it not to follow you'd have to provide compelling evidence that there is something about South Asians that isn't present in the psychological make up of white people which makes them more likely to exploit children sexually. Nobody is looking to prove this here except you.

Oh, no no no.

That's not how statistics work at all.

You said white people are the largest offenders in group CSE cases. Where is your proof?

OK.....now point me to the part where what his sources said was wrong.

You haven't cited anything to support this opinion. You just linked to the article perhaps hoping that everyone else would agree that grooming gangs is a purely Muslim problem.

I'm talking from a purely statistics point of view.

The report finds no evidence to suggest it is a Muslim problem. This is not the same as saying that it is definitely not a Muslim problem. Or a white male problem. Or a pastafarian problem.

 

[UKMikey]

Oh, no no no.

That's not how statistics work at all.

You said white people are the largest offenders in group CSE cases. Where is your proof?

I'm saying that it's more likely that given the relative numbers of white and Muslim people in the UK, and assuming that both groups are equally likely to offend, then for the smaller group to have more offenders in a particular category there has to be something special about that group to make them want to do it. That's what would need to be proved, not my simple argument of proportionality.

OK.....now point me to the part where what his sources said was wrong.

You want me to research his article again? It's an op-ed piece. I can't prove a negative about it. Whether one agrees with it is simply a matter of opinion about how trustworthy the journalist is or the members of the ERG who talked to him (who could very well have a vested interest in discrediting the Home Office report).

I'm talking from a purely statistics point of view.

The report finds no evidence to suggest it is a Muslim problem. This is not the same as saying that it is definitely not a Muslim problem. Or a white male problem. Or a pastafarian problem.

That's not misleading. If the report says it's not a Muslim problem, then the report says it's not a Muslim problem. The implications of assuming that it is for arguments' sake are more dangerous than taking the evidence on face value because they involve targeting a specific ethnic group despite there being no evidence.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I'm saying that it's more likely that given the relative numbers of white and Muslim people in the UK, and assuming that both groups are equally likely to offend, then for the smaller group to have more offenders in a particular category there has to be something special about that group rto make them want to do it. That's what would need to be proved, not my simple argument of proportionality.

Cool.

So it's ok for you to say it's more likely for them to be the majority offenders simply because they are the majority ethnic group yet it's not ok for me to say it's likely Asians are over-represented in terms of group CSE based on actual studies suggesting that they are.

Glad to know where we stand.

You want me to research his article again? It's an op-ed piece. I can't prove a negative about it. Whether one agrees with it is simply a matter of opinion about how trustworthy the journalist is or the members of the ERG who talked to him (who could very well have a vested interest in discrediting the Home Office report).

So now we have to doubt the sources just....because?

That's not misleading. If it's not a Muslim problem, then it's not a Muslim problem. The implications of assuming that it is for arguments' sake are more dangerous than taking the evidence on face value.

Where's the proof it isn't a Muslim problem?

I'm not assuming it is a Muslim problem - I'm saying that there isn't anything to say it isn't a Muslim problem. Or those pesky pastafarians. Is Dr Ella privy to information we don't know?

 

[Scaff]

The median age of white British being higher means that it is skewed....so that....whites may make up a more substantial proportion of under 25’s

Except they don’t, that age range skew non-white in comparison to the other age groups.

 

[UKMikey]

Cool.

So it's ok for you to say it's more likely for them to be the majority offenders simply because they are the majority ethnic group yet it's not ok for me to say it's likely Asians are over-represented in terms of group CSE based on actual studies suggesting that they are.

Glad to know where we stand.

But there's an actual study suggesting that they aren't which you're doing your best to discredit. Nice to know where we stand indeed.

It's more likely unless there's something different about South Asians which you have yet to prove. Your only source is a Mail On Sunday op-ed.

So now we have to doubt the sources just....because?

Just because other sources disagree. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Where's the proof it isn't a Muslim problem?

I'm not assuming it is a Muslim problem - I'm saying that there isn't anything to say it isn't a Muslim problem. Or those pesky pastafarians.

Prove a positive, instead of asking me to prove a negative. There's nothing misleading about the headline based on the evidence provided in the article. Are you going to provide something to back up your own opinions besides the Hodges op-ed that the Stormfront crowd love so much?

Is Dr Ella privy to information we don't know?

I'm assuming she just read the report.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Except they don’t, that age range skew non-white in comparison to the other age groups.

Oh I see what you mean.

I'm not sure that in 6 years non-whites under 25 would account for 38% of that population.

But there's an actual study suggesting that they aren't which you're doing your best to discredit. Nice to know where we stand indeed.

No there isn't. You can't conclude from that report that we don't have enough information to know the figures for Asian offenders and then say we have enough to say white people are the majority offenders.

Just because other sources disagree. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Which other sources

Prove a positive, instead of asking me to prove a negative. There's nothing misleading about the headline based on the evidence provided in the article. When are you going to provide something to back up your own opinions besides the Hodges op-ed that the Stormfront crowd love so much?

....You can't say it isn't a Muslim problem - we don't have the information to reach that conclusion. We have no proof that there is a problem (a positive), or there isn't (a negative). The correct thing is to say: we don't know if there is a Muslim problem.

 

[UKMikey]

No there isn't. You can't conclude from that report that we don't have enough information to know the figures for Asian offenders and then say we have enough to say white people are the majority offenders.

You'd expect both ethnic groups to have an equal chance of offending. There are more people in one ethnic group than the other. Given the absence of any other factors, which group would most offenders come from? The bigger or the smaller group?

Which other sources

Dr Cockbain disagrees. For the umpteenth time, it's an op-ed, not damning proof that there was some kind of whitewash which only affected this study. This is an extraordinary claim which requires more than a whispering campaign by a bunch of eurosceptics to support it.

....You can't say it isn't a Muslim problem - we don't have the information to reach that conclusion. We have no proof that there is a problem (a positive), or there isn't (a negative). The correct thing is to say: we don't know if there is a Muslim problem.

Why mention Muslims in the first place in that case? If other people are saying it's a Muslim problem and the report disagrees, shouldn't that be highlighted in the headline?

To say "there's still a chance that it could be Muslims all along despite the findings in the report pointing the other way" requires wilful opposition. Anything else is just semantics and how one reads the article. I'd go so far as to claim that saying it's a misleading headline is verging on the pedantic.