Groveling Apology to the Gods of Wokeness Thread

[marshwiggle]

The issue, which several here want to put their hands over their ears and sing "la-la-la" about, is that this:

("Man is detained and ID'd returning home after buying tacos when he was mistaken for a criminal suspect" type stories.)

is so much more statistically , factually, nationally likely to happen to a male person of color than any other category.

By the same logic, it is probably the case that when a police officer is killed, it is more likely that the officer is white. So if the killer is not, is that conclusive evidence that the killing was racially motivated?

[Diogenes]

By the same logic, it is probably the case that when a police officer is killed, it is more likely that the officer is white. So if the killer is not, is that conclusive evidence that the killing was racially motivated?

Nope, because you have to compare the proportions of each group. It's not a coin toss where every outcome is equal. If 80% of police are white, you should expect 80% of the deaths to be white officers. If the actual number significantly diverges from that without any other reasonable hidden variable playing a role (geographic location or something), then something is likely afoot.

You can see from this site that while white people are killed by police, white people are disproportionately underrepresented, especially when it comes to unarmed victims. https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/

This is first day statistics 101 stuff.

[marshwiggle]

By the same logic, it is probably the case that when a police officer is killed, it is more likely that the officer is white. So if the killer is not, is that conclusive evidence that the killing was racially motivated?

Nope, because you have to compare the proportions of each group. It's not a coin toss where every outcome is equal. If 80% of police are white, you should expect 80% of the deaths to be white officers. If the actual number significantly diverges from that without any other reasonable hidden variable playing a role (geographic location or something), then something is likely afoot.

If black people make up 13% of the population, then if more than 13% of white officer deaths are caused by black people, does that indicate racial motivation?

[Descartes]

What matters to me is that when you drill down, most of these shootings are actually legally and morally justified.  Most of the rioting is and was based on lies.  Ferguson, and the ensuing violence was based on a lie - and that came out after black witnesses from the neighborhood testified to the grand jury that Michael Brown never had his hands up, never said "don't shoot," and was continuing to act as the aggressor against the police officer.  Never mind the activists hyperbolic language about "extrajudicial execution," which even in the worst of the NON-justified killings I have never seen.

Someone on here (*well, the old fora) once said "Well you CAN'T 'drill down,' because ... uhh ... you know, statistics and what matters is the BIG picture that more blacks are killed." 

What if more blacks are killed justifiably? 

There are also police interactions with millions of blacks and whites everyday that don't end in any force being used.

The whole thing is and was alarmist fiction.


Now ... let me look for some "woke gone wild" stories to share, which, you know, also aren't an epidemic but are fun to laugh about.

Add all of that to the fact that

[mahagonny]

https://www.paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/toxic-words-and-divisive-behavior-trainer-guillot-banned-by-nyra-1-st-racing-racetracks/

Career is over. Not that I care about his career that much. He's perfectly set for life. But Ken Rudolph is a jerk.

[Descartes]

A relative just sent me a screenshot of the syllabus for a COMMUNICATION course she is taking at a major midwestern university.

Are you ready for what kind of COMMUNICATION topics they will be covering?

"Naturalizing sex roles"

"Policing bodies, sexuality, bathrooms, and queer intimacy."

"Slut shaming, slut walks, and walks of shame."



Listen, I'm not arguing that these aren't things to ever study.  These topics seem like they would be right at home in some upper level sociology courses (or a graduate students' research agenda);  but have we apparently gotten to the point that leftist hot button topics must permeate every subject?

[mahagonny]

A relative just sent me a screenshot of the syllabus for a COMMUNICATION course she is taking at a major midwestern university.

Are you ready for what kind of COMMUNICATION topics they will be covering?

"Naturalizing sex roles"

"Policing bodies, sexuality, bathrooms, and queer intimacy."

"Slut shaming, slut walks, and walks of shame."



Listen, I'm not arguing that these aren't things to ever study.  These topics seem like they would be right at home in some upper level sociology courses (or a graduate students' research agenda);  but have we apparently gotten to the point that leftist hot button topics must permeate every subject?

That is ridiculous. A friend of Little Mahagonny Jr. graduated with a degree in communications and she is impressively equipped, i.e. well spoken, competent, methodical, knows how she is perceived in conversation. I doubt she studied at the place you mentioned.

[mahagonny]

Latest casualty in the campaign to alleviate whiteness....https://nypost.com/2021/02/25/toxic-wokeness-taints-a-campus-and-causes-liberal-staffer-to-resign/

[mahagonny]

Since I can't start any new threads on the fora without an objection from somewhere, I'll just put it here. Here's one where there's been an apology, but that's not enough. It seem that Sandra Sellers was lamenting the fact, or impression, that the black students in her class were the lowest performing. Which should be taken as a sign of mere exasperation that one's teaching hasn't been more effective in helping students to excel. An absolutely common sentiment among educators.
Let the stoning begin:
https://meaww.com/sandra-sellers-georgetown-law-professor-racist-comments-black-students-plain-bottom

But then, Rod Dreher, who dares to ask 'why?'

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/sellers-racism-georgetown-law-doesnt-care-about-the-truth/

In any case, what I've heard about attorneys who work as adjunct professors is they never need the money. It's mostly just a way to keep an affiliation that looks good on one's resume. So, if it's not helping you look good, resign. Which she did. And if apologizing makes you look better, then do that also. Because using the affiliation for positive publicity is the whole idea, isn't it?
Is she truly sorry? I doubt it. I think she's too intelligent for that.
Maybe we'll reach a point where colleges can no longer get the services of good quality professionals as part time teachers, for a pittance, that they never deserved in the first place. Wouldn't that be a shame.

on edit: and if anyone thinks they're not coming for you because you've got tenure...good luck. You may need it. Ultimately it may not depend on what protections you have as much as who's gunning for you and who's willing to be silent.