#interracial violent crime

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

Some buzzword generator called me a "white supremacist" and challenged me to look up violent crime stats. So, I did.

[slyandthefamilybook]

A NON-EXHAUSTIVE BUT NEVERTHELESS EXHAUSTING LIST OF NEO-NAZI AND WHITE SUPREMACIST DOGWHISTLES

since some of y'all apparently need a refresher course. as always, use your judement when deciding if it's a dogwhistle or just innocent usage of a number or symbol

NUMBERS

100% - 100 percent white

109 or 110 - A reference to the 109 countries that have expelled, in whole or in part, their Jewish populations. 110 refers to the hope that more countries will do so, usually specifically the United States. Often posted on its own as a reply, or phrased as a question (e.g. "If you were kicked out of 109 bars it's probably our fault")

1290 - A reference to the Edict of Expulsion of 1290, which expelled the Jewish population of England

13/50 or 13/52 or 13/90 - The supposed statistic that Black Americans make up 13% of the population yet commit 50% or 52% of violent crime, or 90% of interracial violence. Often posted on its own as a reply

14 - The Fourteen Words, a Neo-Nazi slogan

14/23 - A number representing the Southern Brotherhood, an Alabama prison gang

1488 - A combination of the Fourteen Words and Heil Hitler

C18 - Combat 18, a British neo-Nazi group

18 - The letters A (1) and H (8), standing for Adolf Hitler

21-2-12 - The Letters U (21), B (2), and 12 (L), standing for Union, Brotherhood, and Loyalty, the slogan of the Unforgiven, a Florida prison gang

23 - Often thrown up as a hand sign, with two fingers raised on one hand and three fingers raised on the other. Represents the letter W (23), standing for white

271,000 - A reference to the supposed fact that the Red Cross claimed only 271,000 people had been murdered in concentration camps. In reality, that number reported by the Red Cross only came from reports from 13 concentration camps (there were 23 main camps, plus a large number of smaller "satellite" camps)

88 - H (8) H (8), standing for Heil Hitler

9% - A number representing the percentage of the world's population that is white

SYMBOLS

((( ))) - Triple parentheses, or echo. Used by neo-Nazis to call out someone as Jewish

Iron Cross - A German military decoration

Sonnenrad (Sun Wheel)

Reichsadler (Imperial Eagle) - A blocky, art-deco eagle facing to the side. Variants exist, some facing right, some facing left. The Parteiadler (Party Eagle) has a slightly different design. The Reichsadler is usually clutching a wreath with a swastika, although this is sometimes left out to maintain plausible deniability

Totenkopf (Death's Head) - A symbol used by the SS

Wolfsangel (Wolf's Hook) - Used as the insignia of various Wermacht (Nazi Military) divisions

Wolfsangel (horizontal)

Odal Rune - From the Proto-Germanic "Othala" meaning heritage

Algiz Rune - A symbol used by German nationalists

Celtic Cross

"Broken Sun" Cross

Arrow Cross - A Hungarian nationalist party that was active from 1935-1945. The symbol has been re-appropriated by modern neo-Nazis

Valknot

EMOJI

🤑 Greedy Face Emoji - Used to refer to "greedy Jews"

💰 Money Bag Emoji - Used to refer to "greedy Jews"

🥸 Disguised Emoji - Used to refer to Jews because of the enlarged nose

🤥 Lying Emoji - Used to refer to Jews because of the enlarged nose

👃 Nose Emoji - Used to refer to Jews

🙋‍♂️ Raising Hand Emoji - Used for its resemblance to the Sieg Heil salute

✋ Raised Hand Emoji - Used for its resemblance to the Sieg Heil salute

o/ or 0/ - Used for its resemblance to the Sieg Heil salute

🐸 Frog Emoji - A reference to Pepe the Frog, a webcomic charcter co-opted by the alt-right

👌 Okay Symbol Emoji - A hand symbol co-opted by the alt-right. Sometimes said to resemble the letters WP, or White Power

🚪 Door Emoji - Refers to the fact that some of the gas chambers (such as the ones at Auschwitz) had wooden doors, and therefore could not have been airtight enough to contain the Zyklon B gas used to murder prisoners. In reality, many of the wooden doors were either replaced with airtight metal ones, or were made airtight with strips of felt that then deteriorated or were removed

🚿 Showerhead Emoji - Refers to the showerheads used to dispense Zyklon B gas in the gas chambers

⛽ Gas Pump Emoji - Refers to gas chambers

⚡⚡ Double Lightning Emojis - Used for their resemblance to the Siegrune (victory rune) badge worn by members of the SS (Schutzstaffel)

💀 Skull Emoji - Used for its resemblance to the Totenkopf (Death's Head) used by the SS

☠️ Skull and Crossbones Emoji - Used for its resemblance to the Totenkopf (Death's Head) used by the SS

WORDS/PHRASES

6MWE - Six Million Wasn't Enough. A call for further genocide against Jews

AKIA - A Klansman I Am

Annudah Shoah - A mockery of both the Shoah (Holocaust) and the fear of further genocide

Auschwitz had a swimming pool/rec center/maternity ward/etc. - An attempt to diminish the horror of concentration camps by making them seem more like labor camps with amenities

Blood and Honor - A neo-Nazi slogan

Blood and Soil - A neo-Nazi slogan

Blood Libel - Not a phrase used by the far right, but something they often believe in or claim. Blood libel is an antisemitic conspiracy theory stretching back hundreds of years. The original claim was that Jews used the blood of Christian babies to bake matzah (a ritual food eaten on Passover). It has since evolved into images of Jews drinking blood, kidnapping and killing non-Jewish babies, and conspiracy theories about harvesting adrenochrome

Bowlcut - A reference to white supremacist mass-murderer Dylan Roof

Cohencidence - A portmanteau of Cohen (a common Jewish last name) and coincidence. Used to refer to Jewish control (e.g. "All these companies are owned by Jews! What a Cohencidence!")

COORS - "Comerades of Our Racial Struggle"

Cultural Marxism - A conspiracy theory that Jews are intentionally weakening "Western values" in order to make countries like the United States more susceptible to communism. This was called Cultural Bolshevism in Nazi Germany

Da Shoah or Muh Shoah or Muh Holocaust - A mockery of the Holocaust

Day of the Rope - A day referenced in neo-Nazi book The Turner Diaries when all race traitors will be hanged

Degenerate - An insult based on the false theory that bad morals will cause human beings to regress along the path of evolution (to de-evolve). Used to describe groups, individuals, or ideologies

Early Life - A reference to the "Early Life" section of Wikipedia biographies, which will reveal that a person is Jewish or has Jewish ancestry

Every Single Time - Every time something bad happens, the perpetrator is Jewish

Featherwood - A term derived from racist prison subculture. A featherwood is a woman associated with a racist gang

FGRN - For God, Race, and Nation. A Ku Klux Klan slogan

The Fourteen Words - A neo-Nazi slogan. "We must secure the existance of our people and a future for white children"

The Frankfurt School - A school of sociology founded at Goethe University Frankfurt in 1923. Usually blamed as the originator of "Cultural Marxism"

Fren - Internet slang. A diminutive of "friend", used to diminish Naziism and make it seems more harmless. Often used in usernames to describe one's self (e.g. sad_fren_88)

Globalist - A person who desires connection between countries in terms of politics, trade, and travel. Used to scaremonger about Jews destroying countries by removing their borders

Gorillion - A mockery of the number 6 million, being the amount of Jews who were murdered in the Holocaust

Goy - Hebrew for "nation", used by Jews to refer to non-Jews/gentiles. Used disparagingly by neo-Nazis to suggest Jews view non-Jews as beneath them

Goyslop - Unhealthy food that Jews force non-Jews to eat to keep them weak

Groid - A shortening of "Negroid", an archaic terms used to describe Black people

Groyper - A follower of avowed neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes. A reference to the "Groyper" meme, a variant of Pepe the Frog

GSHW - Germany Should Have Won (i.e. won World War II)

GTKRWN - Gas the Kikes; Race War Now

HDKH - Hitler Didn't Kill Himself. A neo-Nazi theory that Hitler escaped Germany and fled to Argentina

John 8:44 - "You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies." Part of Jesus' rebuke of his Jewish followers

Joo or Jooz - An intentional misspelling of "Jews" in an attempt to bypass censors or automatic content filters

Kate Hikes - A spoonerism of "hate kikes"

Kek - 4chan variation of "lol"

Kekistan - A fictional country imagined by white nationalists with a flag that resembles the Nazi battle flag

Khazar - A reference to the conversion of a group of Khazars (a Turkic people) to Judaism. Antisemites speculate that the entirity of Ashkenazi Jews are descended from these Khazar converts, and therefore have no historical, cultural, or genetic tie to the Levant. This has been proven false on multiple occasions

Kike - A racial slur against Jews

Lizard People or Reptilians - A conspiracy theory by far-right figure David Icke, claiming that world leaders are really reptilian aliens. Most people who believe this theory believe that the lizard people in question are the Jews

Magic Soil - A protest against the idea that people of one nationality can become people of another nationality simply by living in a country (i.e. "France doesn't have magic soil that turns Africans into Frenchmen")

Nicker - An intentional misspelling of the N word in an attempt to bypass censors or automatic content filters

Ns - Black people (as in the plural of the letter N)

NSDAP - Nationalsozialistiche Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. The Nazi party, but using an acronym that is unfamiliar to most people

NS - National Socialist

Noticer - Someone who "notices" that Jews control the world

The Noticing - A mass movement of people "noticing" that Jews control the world

New World Order - A far-right conspiracy theory about Jews taking control over the world and implementing a single world government. Also used in conjunction with phrases like "world banks"

OFOF - One Front, One Family. Slogan of the neo-Nazi group Volksfront

ORION - Our Race Is Our Nation

Oy Vey - A Yiddish exclamation meaning "oh woe". Used by neo-Nazis to mock Jews

Pattern Recognizer - Someone who has recognized the "pattern" of Jews always being in control

Peckerwood - A term derived from racist prison subculture. A peckerwood is a man associated with a racist gang

Power Level - A memeification of far-right beliefs. The more fascist your beliefs, the higher your "power level"

The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion - A 20th century Russian hoax claiming to be the minutes of meetings between Jewish leaders discussing how they will take control of the world

Pure Blood - Someone who is a pure member of the white race

Rabbi Smolett - A claim that Jews fabricate antisemitic hate crimes (a reference to actor Jussie Smolett who was accused of doing the same)

ROA - Race Over All

The Goyim Know - A phrase used by white supremacists acting like Jews who have discovered white supremacist activity, and are afraid that they've been found out. Often "The Goyim Know, Shut It Down", which adds the idea that Jews will prohibit any conversation that gets too close to the truth

The Red Cross - A reference to the supposed fact that the Red Cross claimed only 271,000 people had been murdered in concentration camps. In reality, that number reported by the Red Cross only came from reports from 13 concentration camps (there were 23 main camps, plus a large number of smaller "satellite" camps)

Tiny Hats or Tiny Hatted People - A reference to the Kippah or Yarmulke often worn by Jewish men

Reject Modernity, Embrace Tradition - A fascist slogan warning against social progress and calling for a return to a prelapsarian (usually ethnocentric) paradise

Rubbing Hands - A reference to an antisemitic charicature called "The Happy Merchant"

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you're not allowed to criticize" - A quote often misattributed to Voltaire, which neo-Nazis use to decry claims of antisemitism as efforts to silence them. In fact, it's a quote from a neo-Nazi pedophile

Shabbos Goy - A non-Jewish neighbor of a Jew who can be asked to perform acts Jews are forbidden from doing on the Sabbath (e.g. turning of a light or turning on the heat). Used by neo-Nazis to claim someone is a slave to Jews

Sheeeiiit - An over-the-top representation of how "shit" is said with a Blaccent. Often used in memes declaring Black people to be less intelligent

Shekels - Jewish currency (from the Hebrew word for weight, similar to how British currency is called the pound. In reality, the plural of shekel is shkalim). The name has been adopted by the State of Israel for the NIS (New Israeli Shekel). "Shekels" is used by neo-Nazis to mock Jews as being greedy

Synagogue of Satan - An antisemitic term for Jews, stemming from the Chrsitian Bible

They or Them - When used to describe a nebulous group of undefined adversaries, these words almost always refer to Jews

They Cry Out in Pain As They Strike You - An antisemitic proverb claiming that Jews will make false cries of antisemitism while at the same time perpetrating atrocities

Troon - A slur against trans people, particularly trans women

Volk - German for "folk", or "kind". Used by neo-Nazis to refer to white people

We Wuz Kangz - A racist phrase ment to mock Black nationalists

White Genocide - The myth that a group of people (usually Jews) are conspiring to eliminate the white race through various means including immigration, intermarriage, and homosexuality

WP - White Power

WN - White Nationalist or White Nationalism

Wooden Doors - Refers to the fact that some of the gas chambers (such as the ones at Auschwitz) had wooden doors, and therefore could not have been airtight enough to contain the Zyklon B gas used to murder prisoners. In reality, many of the wooden doors were either replaced with airtight metal ones, or were made airtight with strips of felt that then deteriorated or were removed

Zio - An abbreviation of "Zionist". Used derogatorialy by neo-Nazis

WPRWS - 'Weimar Problems Require Weimar Solutions" (sometimes shortened to just "Weimar Problems" or "Weimar Solutions"). Prior to the rise of the Nazi Party, the democratic Weimar Republic was in financial crisis (the eponymous "Weimar Problem"). This was often blamed on the Jews. The "Weimar Solution" is Naziism

ZOG - Zionist Occupied Government, reflecting the belief that the United States government is controlled by Jews

[murfpersonalblog]

IWTV S2 Ep7 Musings - Sam Reid's Autumn Brown Interview & White Privilege

(Omg I don't watch Autumn Brown, so I had no idea Sam said all this until the transcript excerpts were posted here. 🤦Usually I love what Sam has to say, but this ain't it, chief.)

The problem with this whole take of Sam's is that Lestat is NOT the one on Trial--LOUIS is. The implications of spinning Come To Me makes Louis look MORE guilty, so that LOU'S DEATH IS JUSTIFIED & DESERVED. IDK if Sam is being deliberately obtuse here (seeing the situation with rose colored blinders to just look at Loustat's tragic love; Lestat's romanticism & hurt feelings cuz that's his character & his focus); or if he's deliberately skirting around a much more important & sensitive issue that, as a white man, he may or may not be aware that he's unequipped to handle--esp. since we know AMC put the lid on interviewers talking with the actors about RACE; and esp. since Jacob speaks very candidly about Louis' blackness when he's asked stupid questions.

Cuz the optics of a white person lying that a black man on trial had raped/molested/SA'd them are way too effing obvious--at least for Bipoc audiences--for Sam to boil it down to "a horrifically mean trick for Lestat to come out and say;" and then gloss it over with Lestat stupidly WANTING Louis to AGREE with the lie that makes him look like a sexual predator; and come away with "it’s very shocking for Lestat in that moment to be smacked in the face with ‘I didn’t want you. I always hated you."

Sure, EVERYONE understands & is in agreement about Loustat's "mutual yearning." But their mutual yearning has no bearings whatsoever on the proceedings happening on that stage. Lestat & Louis certainly AREN'T being mutually sentenced for vampiric crimes, and on pain on DEATH. This Trial is not about proving Louis' romantic/unrequited UST, it's about proving that he's guilty of breaking the Great Laws & proving that Lestat's life/wellbeing was in mortal danger from Louis--not just during Mardi Gras, but the entire time!

Lestat LITERALLY said "Louis ACCOSTED me."

The "pleasure house's" location (at the FairPlay) strengthens the implications of being "accosted" with being sexually harassed--esp. since Les & Santiago first start off with Louis' history as a "troubled, disreputable, cold, violent" pimp. Les said that everywhere he went, he was "being HUNTED" by Louis--like prey to a predator.

So if getting mad at Lou for being angry & hurt is all Lest takes away from Lou's reaction against having Come to Me weaponized to make Lou look like a rapist--then by god Les truly had no business being in an interracial relationship & raising a Black child. 😒

Les is so seated in his white privilege (and too busy screwing his white wench Antoinette down in Algiers) that he somehow missed the entire 1921 Tulsa Massacre, and the 1923 Rosewood Massacre, and the 1931-32 Scottsboro Boys case; to not read a effing newspaper or hear about all these Black men being lynched for raping white girls (who LIED on them) during Jim Crow!

Like, we talk about Tulsa & Rosewood wrt the Storyville race riot in 1x3, but I've yet to see anybody talk about how both of those massacres were started cuz white folk wanted to lynch innocent Black men accused of raping white people who lied on them & gaslit the whole country into believing them just cuz white = honest/innocent/good and black = liar/guilty/evil.

How DARE a Black man on Trial by a bloodthirsty predominately white lynch mob be furious that he's being lied on by a charismatic AF white man brought in to testify AGAINST him--

--who's explicitly presented as "THE VICTIM;" the first & ONLY witness whose words were to be trusted (Claudia's diary/words were only used to CONDEMN them, entirely removed from their context as a CHILD who felt unwanted & unloved by the father she was constantly trying to GET AWAY FROM, but who forcibly brought her BACK)--while Lou's context is stripped from him as the spouse who only killed Les for the sake of his DAUGHTER'S freedom. Lou never wanted to leave Les & NOLA; and he freaked TF out after he slit Les' throat & chokeslammed Claudia for tryna burn him--Claudia's diaries even exonerate Lou, PISSED at him for NOT wanting Les dead & for being "dead weight" thirsting after Les the whole time they were in Romania, 5 years later! All Lou wanted was to COME TO LES. Lou swam the nasty AF Mississippi River cuz LES WROTE A EFFING SONG NAMED COME TO ME that Lou STILL has the recording of IN HIS VOICE.

For a closeted gay Black man desperate to keep up appearances & be respected in society, Louis sacrificed EVERYTHING to be with Lestat--his loyalty to Paul (ie: God: x x) and his self respect/dignity/reputation most crucially, only to have that sacrifice (ie: love) ripped to shreds & sullied during the Trial--LESTAT BETRAYED LOUIS, not the other way around, WTF. Esp. cuz YES, Louis DID want Les to come to him the whole time. Even at the TRIAL, Jacob said all Louis was happy to see Les again.

Until Les opened his effing mouth & started spewing BS!

Lou LOVES Les, and trusted & confided in him as a gay closeted man tryna AVOID Les (esp. after being spooked by his gay crisis spooked him when they slept together)--only to be SPAT ON when Les tells all of Paris that he's nothing but a pervert who accosted/hunted/lusted after a man/vampire who made it seem that 1) LES didn't want LOU, and 2) that Les's safety/wellbeing was in danger--when HE'S the gay VAMPIRE wearing Oscar Wilde's chrysanthemum to dinner & baiting/luring Louis to HIS house with Lily waiting on the balcony in her effing underwear!

Remember: Lestat did this whole Come to Me spiel for the audience BEFORE his whole Gay Pride speech. The soldier yelled the F-slur after Les finished their Church Vows; and the whole crowd LAUGHED. This was NOT an audience who thought POSITIVELY about two guys being in a relationship--

--"the love that DARE NOT speak its name," even in gay mecca 1940s Paris (at the time the age of consent was 15 for straight couples but 21 for gay ones), where guys had to meet under the cover of night; hidden in the shadows even while in a public park/in plain sight--just like the vampires themselves.

The audience DGAF about Lestat's romanticism & Loustat's tragic gothic romance. They care about sexual deviancy--despite charismatic AF Santiago having said the very first night that the whole premise of the Theatre was to flip social mores upside-down--the bloodthirsty audience still wasn't effing buying gay sex! 💀

So not only is Les petitioning to a group of homophobes to see him as a victim, but he's are also throwing Louis, as a Black man, under the bus to a predominately white crowd as the villain--

--and yet people get mad at Louis for badmouthing Les in 1973 SanFran, and (LESS-SO) in Dubai??? When NEITHER time was Les being sentenced to death--but the vampires are still tryna kill LOUIS, even though it's DANIEL'S book and HE'S the vampire on national TV!

Again: LOUIS gets punished while these white men walk scott free. Louis gets dropped from the effing stratosphere with ALL his bones broken but his pain is dismissed as "a hard fall, nothing more;" while Louis put Les in the dump with a bunch of rats so Les could heal & NOT be burned alive, saving Les' effing life when Claudia would've GRILLED his arse, and yet Louis' found guilty!?

And again: Louis was actively being gaslit on stage, his brain LITERALLY being scrambled under the Mind Gift of the coven, while Claudia's literally over his right shoulder saying one thing, while Lestat's the devil on the left saying the total opposite. He's conscious, but he's barely more cognizant than Madeleine! But HE'S the liar?!

And again: Lestat's pain & hurt feelings gets centered, when it's LOUIS' ankles that are slashed to the bone so he can't walk or escape the lynchers ready to stone him & his daughter(s); HIS mind fogged whenever he tries to speak up & defend himself--with no one to help him but the very same dude lying his arse off to assassinate Louis' character and twist their story to excuse why he cheated (acting like he never said he wanted "VARIETY" way back in 1x3) & why Louis deserves to have lynchers in the crowd yelling "Shame on you!" as if there weren't TWO parties in this MUTUAL yearning.

I can't.

But again: Imma throw Sam a bone, cuz we know AMC's been weird about interviewers sidestepping actual substantial convos about race--and AFAIK Sam's never really said anything about Louis' blackness & how Lestat responds/dismisses it anyway, so. 🙄😒 Maybe it's for the best that Sam stays in his white lane--but it's still racially tone deaf AF that Loustat's race & contemporaneous IRL events that directly match the show aren't even up for frikkin discussion.

[us-cj]

I'd rather stand by facts than by mob hysteria driven by the radical left. Black on white interracial violent crime rate is +60 X the rate of white interracial violent crime against blacks in the U. S.

Facts are as follow:

There were 547,948 violent crimes by blacks against whites in America in 2018, versus 59,778 violent crimes by whites against blacks. If you adjust the data for demographics, namely a much smaller black population, the numbers are even more staggering.

Total blacks 47,800,000 with 547,948 instances against whites = 1146 per 100k

Total whites 329,200,000 with 59,778 instances against blacks = 18 per 100k

Black violent crime rate against whites is 1146 per 100k,

White violent crime rate against blacks is 18 per 100k

The rate of black interracial violent crime rate targeting whites is +60 X the rate of white interracial violent crime against blacks!

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics: Criminal Victimization, 2018' Table 14

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf

[papirouge]

the fact that the same rightoid looking down on Black hood gang violence, while enthusiastically entertaining anime/video game celebrating foreign gang culture (Tokyo Revenger, Yakuza gaming serie) is everything you need to know that those people don't have a problem with violence or crime, but rather WHO perpetuates it

To them, Black men with gun will always somehow be a bigger problem than an actual mafia (laundering money, trafficking human, selling drugs...) and I think it says A LOT about what criminality well "branded" can do

The Italians did the same with their own mafia (tbe Godfather trilogy)

On a whole different lane, I think it's the same with women desirability

Stats show that Asian women are the most desirable women transcending all races of men, and I can't help but thinking that generations who grew up with anime & manga has something to do with that. Anime & Manga is a fantastic promotional asset for the East Asian woman. She's shown as submissive, cute, sexually available... It comes off as no surprise that east Asian women are so prized among Millennial and Gen zenners.

And let's not forget Latina women, who got an intensive promotion through the whole romanticism/eroticism of Latin music. It's also interesting how Latina women are elevated for being hot blooded and their "attitude" is sexy...when for the same reason, Black women are looked down and lay at the bottom barrel in term of dating desirability accross other races.

This is not a doom post (lol) but I want to tell every Black woman reading this that none of this comes out of vacuum. Personal branding comes a long way, and that you are not undesirable because of your Blackness.

Never forget that Italians and Japanese managed to promote their most violent criminals as cool and iconic....EVERYTHING can become attractive when properly branded.

Black women just need an actual decent promotion and image boost to grind back to the top.

I should had that men actually have a huge responsibility in that branding : male mangaka are those who pulled out this whole culture elevating a whole myth about the japanese girl, Latino did the same about their women.... But since Black men never bothered doing the same, Black women never got access to the same prerogative.

I think Slavery and Colonization fucked Black men beyond repair , because instead of elevating their own (women), bagging 'other'/lighter women got ingrained into their psyche as a social come up. Meanwhile, Black women are left with dust.

Hence the whole resentment of Black women against Black men preferring non Black women - while being gaslighted about other (non Black) men never wanting to date them. So they're fated to be "faithful" to Black men (by refusing to date out) while Black men don't have any issue with interracial dating.... This situation frustrates A LOT of Black women and it's painful to see.

Our only solace is:

Learning to properly brand ourselves

Open our dating option and stop looking for being accepted by men whose preference is elsewhere

Not paying attention to usual gaslighting (black women are undesirable therefore have to settle down with dusties, etc.)

Get comfortable with the idea of remaining single for a long time because the availability of quality men is getting lower

VET every single potential romantic partner. Don't let anyone approach or touch you without being SURE that both of you have commitment in your mind

[ausetkmt]

The claim: There are significant race-based disparities in civilian homicide rates, but not in police homicide rates.

A viral meme purports to list homicide statistics by race in the United States, as follows:

Whites killing Blacks — 2%

Police killing whites — 3%

Whites killing whites — 16%

Blacks killing whites — 81%

Police killing Blacks — 1%

Blacks killing Blacks — 97%

The page behind one viral version of the post, I Support Law Enforcement Officers, had over 611 shares on its post. USA TODAY has reached out to the page for comment.

Some versions of the meme include this line: "America does have a problem. But it's not what the media tells you it is."

More:Fact check: What's true and what's false about voting by mail in 2020

Rates of white-on-white and Black-on-Black homicide are similar, at around 80% and 90%

Overall, most homicides in the United States are intraracial, and the rates of white-on-white and Black-on-Black killings are similar, both long term and in individual years.

Between 1980-2008, the U.S. Department of Justice found that 84% of white victims were killed by white offenders and 93% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.

In 2018, the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that 81% of white victims were killed by white offenders, and 89% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.

In 2017, the FBI reported almost identical figures — 80% of white victims were killed by white offenders, and 88% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders.

Though the numbers differ year-to-year, the stark difference that the viral post attempts to portray between the rates of white-on-white and Black-on-Black homicide — which it puts at 16% and 97%, respectively — is inaccurate.

Both numbers tend to hover between 80% and 90% and remain within 10 percentage points of each other.

Rates of Black-on-white and white-on-Black homicide also within 8 points

Likewise, the post attempts to portray a gulf in the rate of Black-on-white and white-on-Black homicide — which it lists at 81% and 2%, respectively.

Statistics from the FBI in 2018 and 2017 contradict that claim.

In 2018, 16% of white victims were killed by Black offenders, while 8% of Black victims were killed by white offenders.

Similarly, in 2017, 16% of white victims were killed by Black offenders, while 9% of Black victims were killed by white offenders.

Police kill Black people at disproportionate rates

Though nationwide statistics are less readily available, multiple studies have found that police kill Black people at disproportionate rates.

A study in the American Journal of Preventative Medicine in 2016 examined all 812 fatalities that resulted from use of lethal force by on-duty law enforcement from 2009-2012 in 17 states. The study used National Violent Death Reporting System data. 

The majority of victims were white people, at 52%, but "black victims were over-represented (32.4%) relative to the U.S. population."  The fatality rate was 2.8 times higher among Black victims than white victims.

Most victims were reported to be armed, at 83%, but black victims were more likely to be unarmed, at 14.8%, than white victims, at 9.4%, the study found.

Similarly, a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2019 found that Black men and women are killed by police at higher rates than their white counterparts.

Specifically, Black men are about 2.5 times more likely to be killed by police over the course of their lifetime than white men, while Black women are about 1.4 times more likely to be killed by police than white women.

Both studies reveal that the claim from the viral post that police kill white people at 3% and Black people at 1% is false.

Our rating: False

Based on our research, all six purported homicide statistics in the viral post are FALSE. The significant race-based disparities are also false. In reality, rates of white-on-white and Black-on-Black homicides  are similar and remain within 10 percentage points of each other, around 80% and 90%, respectively. Likewise, rates of Black-on-white and white-on-Black homicide remain within eight percentage points of each other, at around 16% and 8%. And police kill Black people at disproportionate and much higher rates than they kill their white counterparts.

Our fact-check sources:

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 2011, Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980-2008

Federal Bureau of Investigations, Uniform Crime Reporting, Crime in the United States 2018, Expanded Homicide Data Table 6

National Library of Medicine, American Journal of Preventative Medicine, November 2016, Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, August 2019, Risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States by age, race–ethnicity, and sex

[rotationalsymmetry]

OK. So. I’ve posted before about the intersection of being in favor of less rape happening in the world/being in favor of generally taking rape seriously as a horrible thing, and also being in favor of prison abolition, or rather, commenting on “but don’t we need prisons because rapists???” and having just watched the documentary 13th that’s bringing up some thoughts so here we go.

They are not particularly nice thoughts unfortunately. Break because I think content warnings + break is a more sensible way of doing things than content warnings in tags. None of this stuff is like “owned” by me btw, repost/translate/paraphrase as desired.

It comes back to what people mean by rape. I’m going to suggest that people have two highly conflicting ideas of what rape is and what’s wrong with it, even though we talk as though this is one thing and everyone agrees on what it is and why it’s bad.

My understanding of rape, the reasonable one imo, is that rape is bad because it’s a violation of bodily autonomy and it causes trauma/suffering.

I mean, obviously, right?

But there’s a competing understanding of rape that has to do with purity culture and genetics and, frankly, viewing women as property and as baby incubators, and that understanding of rape (the wrong one) is basically conceiving of it as a form of theft: a chaste woman who belongs to a specific man or family or culture gets fucked in specifically possibly pregnancy inducing way by someone who doesn’t have the right to fuck her.

You’ll notice all sorts of problems with that last one. It doesn’t call marital rape rape. It isn’t actually what most rapes look like at all. It doesn’t acknowledge that men (well… people who don’t have a uterus, this worldview is also ragingly transphobic) can be sexually violated. And it does not actually distinguish between consensual but disapproved of sex (eg adultery) and rape. That’s horrifying and fucked up.

But I gotta say having just watched 13th, the whole “we need prisons because black men specifically are violent and scary” thing is clearly not about the reasonable definition of rape. It’s about the second one.

It has to be about the second one. Because I’d you’re concerned about bodily violation and trauma, well, guess what else violates people’s bodily autonomy and deeply traumatizes them.

Well, ok, there is one way it can be about bodily autonomy and trauma. And that way is if you care about some people’s bodily autonomy and safety and not others’. And I do suppose “black lives matter” is a better slogan than “it’s about bodily autonomy, you fuckers.”

(anyways this is why watching the 13th is probably better than listening to any number of my tumblr rants on this subject. The documentary basically just goes “so, interracial rape, did you know that more commonly goes the other way?” and leaves it at that.)

(I feel the need to talk about it though because the documentary talks about how a murder/rape by a convicted (criminal? Murderer? Don’t remember) who had a weekend pass out of prison cost Dukakis the election and that’s why Clinton was “tough on crime” and so much of the really awful things (and the largest increase in number of people incarcerated) happened under Clinton’s administration, not Nixon’s or Reagan’s. Thing is, it’s not that it doesn’t matter that the two highly traumatizing or fatal things I mentioned in this paragraph that are actually “crimes” happened. But the response was, uh, disproportionate. And traumatizing. And deadly. And a violation of people’s bodily autonomy.

Just not “criminal” because it’s not a crime when the state violates your bodily autonomy, deeply traumatizes you, or kills you. (Or when, eg, George Zimmerman does it and the state goes “what, he gets to stand his ground, that’s not like murder murder. Just because some teenager ended up dead.”)

[pleasantpedanticny]

ummm.. why, I will tell you.

My students asked why i thought it was scary how the republican led supreme court works now.

I said they forget that noone has any rights they cant fight for ir defend unless law and social sstructure create and protect those rights.

The following are a things I had to explain to my students were illegal or legal until during my lifetime men and women fought and gained the legal rights.

I was a child bur alive when it became illegal to fire women for:

Being pregnant.

Not wanting to get pregnant.

Wearing pants.

Not wearing a bra.

Refusing to answer sex/family questions.

Not smiling when sexually harassed.

I was an adult before the first state recognized Same Sex Marriage. I watched the president fight against marriage equality. I had friends attacked at the courthouse by marriage defense activists.

I was alive when it was first formally legally protected in the United States that "marital rape" was rape... that is that a violent rape could not be rape if in that rape the rapist was the spouse of the victim. Even if they were seperated or in process of getting divorced.

I grew up in NYC while redlining and bias meant housing segregation was Jom Crow level and you had nothing to do if a landlord doesnt want to rent to people like you. It is still legal in some places to be biased in buisiness and housing against couples in interracial relationships because most laws specify the bias is race and therefore if the bias extends to two people of different race the law cannot apply.

Less than 20 years ago palong. I KNOW WERE were gay-bashed alot.... and hate crime laws didn't apply most places. And in most places laws didn't require cops to even record attacks. Federal law making reporting required made these things visible and fixable.... well less bad not fixed.

In my home state and in the state in which u went to college tattooing was illegal until around 1998. In both states refusing to hire tattooed people. Or firing people because they have tattoos was legal. Today most places don't have protections for tattoos but some protections apply.

seriously... why am I scared? Because on the supreme court we have four people who publicly say they aren't sure the federal government can provide and protect a y rights... and fucking Clarence Thomas a rich Black man married to a rich white woman has said publicly he disagrees with the Supreme Court decision making interracial marriage a legal thing nationally.

You know as a cis-het-white man I don't need to be as scared as many other people. But I don't want my friends dead or without rights. I don't want my family to be disenfranchised...I don't want the work of generations to make a fair and just world erased for the gain of a few bigots.

It can all go away if one doesn't keep the fight going.

Your opponents are always fighting. So we must also.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Richard Hanania

Published: May 14, 2023

The topic of black crime has taken over Twitter. It all started when Elon Musk responded sympathetically to a Tweet that presented data showing black-on-white crime is the most common form of interracial violence. The original tweet was completely correct, and you can see Noah Carl for some of the sophistry that has been used to try to deny or obfuscate on the underlying facts.

I personally don’t have the patience for taking part in these kinds of arguments, at least in the way that Noah is engaging here. It’s like the people who spend all their time arguing with trans and feminists by pointing to *scientific studies* showing that boys have penises and girls have vaginas. Men have more grip strength. Scientists just proved it! I guess someone has to do it, and I’ve run into some actual human beings (on the internet anyway) who tell me that they accepted the blank slate view of sex until they looked at the data. This makes me sad. But since the data does convince some people, I guess I’m glad someone is providing it.

Race and crime is similar. The numbers are there if you need them. I suppose foreigners might. But I grew up just outside of Chicago, and data on black criminality is to me just as unnecessary as sex comparisons of grip strength. Chicago is about a third black. Like many midwestern cities, it is extremely violent, with nearly all of the crime concentrated in black neighborhoods. When crime does spill over into the nicer areas, it’s committed by the people from those neighborhoods.

I knew many family friends who were Middle Eastern immigrants and store owners in the city. Every now and then, some distant relation or acquaintance would get their store looted or, in at least one instance I remember, shot and killed. Michael Jordan’s greatness was much appreciated and respected but its consequences used to fill the community with fear, because another championship tended to create another possibility that stores would go up in flames. The Arabs would speak in shorthand. “What happened to Walid’s store?” “You know, the blacks…” “Ah.” Actually, they would say “the slaves,” if you want to really know how Arabs talk.

Here’s the thing: while only immigrants and white proles explicitly discuss this aspect of their reality, every single person within the orbit of the city behaves as if they know the truth. No matter who you are, unless you’re one of the residents of those communities, your life is organized around avoiding the pathologies of the inner city. If you’re a desperate immigrant, you might open up a store, put up a “We Take EBT” sign, and take the risk of being shot. White Americans are less inclined to do this, so they instead just flee black neighborhoods and do what they can to get their kids out of black schools. They’ll make any commute or pay whatever tuition is necessary. No one is confused about this — liberals are correct that entire swaths of a major city don’t end up with zero white people by accident. They just attribute this to “racism” rather than the desire not to be sexually assaulted or physically harmed.

I’ve been talking about Chicago, but the same things are true for Milwaukee, Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, Baltimore, and countless other major cities. It’s also true for the cities where American elites and policymakers live like Washington, DC, which is why I’m always amused by theories that say they are actually acting in their own interests by coddling criminals. Other than blacks themselves, no group would benefit more from solving our crime problem than wealthy urban whites.

We can therefore ignore those who deny the reality of black crime. They’re either too stupid or dishonest to engage with. Among others on the left, there has been an acceptance of reality combined with pleas to simply frame the issue differently.

When liberals talk about perspective here, what they usually mean is that the likelihood of a white person being victimized by a black person is small in an absolute sense, so why worry about it? It would be a fine argument, except that we are constantly told to obsess over the harms done by police shootings, white supremacist violence, and vigilantes falsely accusing innocent black men of crimes.

I thought about showing you NYT and CNN headlines implying that blacks have to live in constant fear due to racism. But you’ve probably seen them, and instead I’ll share this clip showing how the topic was addressed a few years ago on a major network TV show.

As a digression, I would recommend checking out a few episodes of A Million Little Things if you want to see the horror that is the PC therapeutic slop that normies are being fed these days, but that’s a discussion for a different time.

So the crime debate has been going something like this.

Conservatives: Look at all the black-on-white crime.

Liberals: Get some perspective man. It’s nothing compared to the chances of being murdered by your own race. Not to mention heart attacks or covid. These are very small numbers.

Conservatives: You guys are the ones telling us blacks are living in constant fear. Stop doing that.

Now, when having these debates, what’s frustrating is that people are usually talking past one another. There’s not like one guy named “conservatives” and one guy named “liberals.” The liberals who are telling you to have some perspective on black crime often aren’t the same ones pushing the narrative that blacks should live in fear of whites. It’s easy to “own” the other side by putting together views of different people and finding contradictions.

That being said, the myth of substantial white-on-black violence is so deeply embedded in the culture that it’s a storyline in network TV shows. I think it’s fair to ask people to take a position on it. If you dislike racists on Twitter focusing too much on black-on-white crime, know that they are closer to the truth than the race obsessives on the other side, and have a lot less power.

One odd thing about these calls for perspective is that when liberals say that intra-racial crime is more common than crime that crosses group boundaries, what they are essentially saying is don’t worry about black crime, because the victims are overwhelmingly black people. But wait! Since when are liberals uninterested in problems that disproportionately affect blacks? These are the people who write serious NYT think pieces about how national parks are too white. They now turn around and say, let’s not talk too much about murder, because blacks are the victims? It’s a very odd thing, and it’s hard for me to even steelman their lack of interest in solving this issue as they obsess over every other black grievance, real or imagined.

Some years ago I noticed that fact checkers started providing “perspective” on claims rather than simply saying whether they were true or false. Of course, what perspective to take on facts is a huge part of what political discourse is about. Do blacks commit a lot of violence against whites? Compared to the number of cancer deaths, no. But in the context of a comparison to white-on-black violence, absolutely. One can conduct a similar analysis of issues like covid, terrorism, and school shootings.

For me, I like cost-benefit analysis as the way to understand what problems are worth worrying about and what we should be doing about them.

Black-on-white violence is not the biggest issue in the world, but it is useful to talk about in order to challenge narratives that pose much more serious problems. Arguments about supposed racism committed by whites against blacks are why we can’t effectively fight crime in this country and why we can’t have freedom of association or meritocratic criteria in hiring. The belief in white racism as a major factor in American life is the force that distorts all of policymaking and culture. Any arguments that are effective at discrediting that narrative are worth making.

And no, I don’t consider acting on statistical realities to be a kind of racism society should solve. Once you remove reactions that are based on group behavior, and private preferences that are none of the government’s business in a free society, the remaining “racism” in the United States against blacks is negligible, and more than balanced out by the ways in which they are advantaged.

The truth of the matter is we have a disgraceful amount of crime in the US, and the costs are not simply a matter of the number of people robbed, raped, and killed. It’s also a tragedy that what could be some of the most valuable urban real estate in the country is basically uninhabitable. In fact, part of the reason that black-on-white violence is rare in this country is because whites have overwhelmingly fled places where blacks live due to the threat of violence.

Other pathologies of American life, like NIMBYism, which drives up the cost of housing, are also downstream of the crime issue. If you’re a resident of Tokyo, you don’t need to worry about greater density leading to a decline in public safety, the way that Americans have to.

There’s no “perspective” one can take from which a reasonable observer won’t find that inner city crime is a major problem, and something we should do our best to solve. The chart below shows the ten American cities of at least 100,000 people that have the highest murder rates, and how they compare to the most violent countries in the world. The murder rates for cities come from CBS, while the country data comes from the World Bank.

[ How the ten most violent US cities with a population over 100,000 compare to the most violent countries in the world. Red is US cities, blue is countries. ]

You might be saying that it’s unfair to compare cities to entire countries, since urban areas might have concentrated violence. Yet the most violent countries in the world tend to be small. For example, St Louis, which is number one in murder in the chart above, has 293,000 people. That’s a larger population than St Lucia (180,000) and St Vincent (104,000), which are shown on the graph. Detroit has 632,000 people, making it more than 50% larger than either the Bahamas (407,000) or Belize (400,000). New Orleans (384,000) and Cleveland (373,000) are close behind. So this isn’t a matter of cherry-picking areas with minuscule populations and making them look bad. These cities are the size of small countries, which means we are pretty much comparing apples-to-apples in many of these cases. And if you want to make a real apples-to-apples comparisons, try contrasting American cities to those in other first world countries, like London.

As I argue in my articles on El Salvador, any polity that has a high enough murder rate needs to make solving crime its number one priority. This was true for that nation before Bukele came along, as it is for major American cities today. It’s not a big mystery how to do this, it’s just politically difficult, because literally everything that works is considered racist. You need more cops, more prisons, and more use of DNA databases and facial recognition technology. You can’t have concerns about disparate impact in a world where crime is so overwhelmingly committed by one group. And yes, liberals are right about one thing, which is that gun laws matter too.

But the left is so out of its mind on everything touching on race that even though they’re right that gun laws matter, when it comes to actually enforcing them, they tend to shy away from doing so for the obvious reason.

While I support policies that can make incremental improvements, actually solving our crime problem to any serious extent would take a revolution in our culture or system of government. Whether you want to focus on guns or the criminals themselves, it would involve heavily policing, surveilling, and incarcerating more black people. If any part of you is uncomfortable with policies that have an extreme disparate impact, you don’t have the stomach for what it would take. And, unlike some, I’m not naive enough to think that non-criminal blacks would end up grateful towards those who took the steps necessary to make their communities safer.

Dealing with the crime issue is complicated for reasons that go deep to the heart of the American psyche, which means there’s little hope that things will change any time soon. Until they do, we should continue to at the very least push back on the most malicious lies being told about race in America.

[nicmor]

Blog Post #3

This week, we watched and dove deep in to the film, “Candyman” directed by Jordan Peele. This film had very interesting elements incorporated. To begin, I thought that there being interracial love in the film was interesting as the black man and white woman who was in fact in black face were in love. I do think this says a lot about the time period the film took place in as interracial love was looked down upon. Although I did not enjoy how violent the film was, another theme that stood out to me was the urban crime. The lynching and the violence also says a lot about the time period and issues that were faced at that time. However, I did think the part where if the word “candyman” was said five times, the person died was thrilling and put me at the edge of my seat as it was something I was not expecting to happen. After Thursday’s lecture, I was able to gain a deeper understanding as to why the film is quite problematic. I thought that black individuals are seen as props is not something that sits well with me. In addition, I did not like how black pain was expressed thought a white individuals eyes. I think that is inappropriate and incorrect as black pain should be shown as it is. I think I liked the new “Candyman” more as it demonstrated the more modern issues of racism. These being gentrification, police brutality, housing issues, and more. I really appreciated that these important modern-day problems were brought up in the second film as it shows a different side of racism. I thought that the incorporation of the Black Lives Matter was a great addition as it demonstrates the modern day fight for black justice. Moreover, I thought the element of the puppets was very creative as it allowed one to use their imaginations to what was going on rather than it being more apparent. I also thought it was a fun addition to the horror aspect of the film as horror isn’t my favorite. I also appreciated that the second candyman film had more humor so it wasn’t as intense as the first film. Although both films had really compelling themes, I did enjoy the second film much more than the first as it wasn’t as intense and because the themes were more relevant to the time we are living in. 

[someotherdog]

@thewolfruns / in reply to this.

he hadn’t been an actual mormon in more than fifteen years, but in the rare instances where bill was actually afraid, his prayers always went to heavenly father. his arms hadn’t folded in order to pray since he was a teenager, and even then, he hadn’t believed in any of it. from birth, he seemed unable to call himself a mormon. other children, even ones that grew up to leave the church, at least believed in it for a time. they could never sell bill on it, and the elders labeled him as rebellious at the age of seven. he was a problem child, he was someone to be dealt with; he acted up in church and his mother would pinch his ear until he behaved, but it just made him worse. wang lei was supposed to be their priesthood holder, but that title really fell to genelle. his father hadn’t been raised in mormonism, he was a convert that really only converted because he fell in love with genelle—there was no way they could be together if he didn’t convert, but even then most people didn’t approve of it. their marriage was an unconventional one, the church didn’t even support interracial marriage up until a few years before bill’s birth, and his mother had been expected to marry a generational mormon that her parents approved of. they certainly didn’t expect genelle to marry her optometrist that had recently moved to utah from china.

neither wang lei or genelle had expected a child like bill. they expected obedience, and he gave them the exact opposite. he was unruly, bad tempered, regularly called a brat. he would refuse to engage in church, not for his parents or the elders. his childhood felt like an exercise in waiting, simply existing until he became old enough to escape. he was a piece of shit teenager that made his mother regularly cry, no matter how many times they threatened to send him back to the re-education camp in arizona, and his parents finally gave up on the moment he officially decried the holy ghost. within a year, he was kicked out (though bill thought of it more as a mutual decision). leaving home, he surfed a few ex-mormon couches and slept on the streets for a few nights here and there, before he ultimately ended up in las vegas. there, he met a los lobos locos member, and it wasn’t long before he realized this was what he was meant to do: sin. perhaps crime was a better word for it, but it was all the same to bill. he saw the money, the girls, the drugs that the lobos had, and he wanted that too. he wanted to be a lobos. he wanted to be the wolf.

he became a lobos. it was a hard, violent process, like any gang initiation. it was sort of strange, how he hated growing up in organized religion, just to join a criminal organization. bill could pray to the god of kalashnikovs with serial numbers filed off and seedy nightclubs bought with dirty money. he could wash and anoint himself in blood if he had to. there was very little that bill would not do for the lobos, even spending three years and a separate eight months in prison for them. it took him almost twenty years to reach the top, and he still wasn’t running the show. he hadn’t actually wanted that, he didn’t think. he had been very comfortable in his station, living in a beautiful west hollywood penthouse and earning money he didn’t deserve (and couldn’t claim on his taxes!).

so, yes, he was a sinner. he made sure to sin every day, which was admittedly a little hard to do in a micro society based out of a casino hotel. so his sins were small in scale, little naughty deeds like hiding someone’s shirt or sneaking a bit of someone’s rations. he almost reverted into a child in church, making faces at the bishop during sacrament or sneaking a cookie before dinner. they were minuscule compared to the sins of his adulthood: racketeering, credit card scams, gun trafficking, even a few instances of murder. they were small in scale, but they were still sins in the eyes of heavenly father, and that was what mattered. it made it so his eschewing of his parents was not in vain. he was a sinner, and he made sure everyone knew it.

he laughed at her question, so pretty and so unbearably stoic. he was used to women fawning over him, in all sorts of ways and all types of women, but they all had one thing in common: they bought his bullshit. tovah was a wall that refused to fall. “yeah, well, i just don’t want anyone to get the wrong idea. i’m not a good guy, and i never have been.” was that not obvious in the way he treated her little brother? not every single woman that bought his bullshit thought they could fix him, but most did. most tried. and failed. “it’s easier to be upfront about it.” bill was a powder keg looking for a spark—he didn’t know how long he’d last in the flamingo before it all inevitably went up in flames. the people of the casino were weak, as were a lot of the californians, but his initial group had a salvation: they knew how to survive outside if they had to. when he was to eventually leave, and it was eventual, he would allow any of his former group to come along with him as long as they could keep up. and serena, too, obviously. he may have severed the bond with his mother and father, and while it was a tenuous bond with his sister, she was his sister. she’d listen to him, in the end, she’d come with him. he hoped tovah would too. “what about you? was there ever a time when you weren’t completely in control of your emotions? have you ever sinned, tovah?”

[us-cj]

Black violent crime rate targeting whites is +60X the rate of white interracial violent crime against blacks!

Facts are as follow: There were 547,948 violent crimes by blacks against whites in America in 2018, versus 59,778 violent crimes by whites against blacks. If you adjust the data for demographics, namely a much smaller black population, the numbers are even more staggering.

Total blacks 47,800,000 with 547,948 instances against whites = 1146 per 100k

Total whites 329,200,000 with 59,778 instances against blacks = 18 per 100k

Black violent crime rate against whites is 1146 per 100k,

White violent crime rate against blacks is 18 per 100k

Black violent crime rate targeting whites is +60X the rate of white interracial violent crime against blacks!

U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics: Criminal Victimization, 2018' Table 14

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf

[campmurderparty]

bill & tovah.

He hadn’t been an actual Mormon in more than fifteen years, but in the rare instances where Bill was actually afraid, his prayers always went to heavenly father. His arms hadn’t folded in order to pray since he was a teenager, and even then, he hadn’t believed in any of it. From birth, he seemed unable to call himself a mormon. Other children, even ones that grew up to leave the church, at least believed in it for a time. They could never sell Bill on it, and the elders labeled him as rebellious at the age of seven. He was a problem child, he was someone to be dealt with; he acted up in church and his mother would pinch his ear until he behaved, but it just made him worse. Wang Lei was supposed to be their priesthood holder, but that title really fell to Genelle. His father hadn’t been raised in Mormonism, he was a convert that really only converted because he fell in love with Genelle–there was no way they could be together if he didn’t convert, but even then most people didn’t approve of it. Their marriage was an unconventional one, the church didn’t even support interracial marriage up until a few years before Bill’s birth, and his mother had been expected to marry a generational mormon that her parents approved of. They certainly didn’t expect Genelle to marry her optometrist that had recently moved to Utah from China.

Neither Wang Lei or Genelle had expected a child like Bill. They expected obedience, and he gave them the exact opposite. He was unruly, bad tempered, regularly called a brat. He would refuse to engage in church, not for his parents or the elders. His childhood felt like an exercise in waiting, simply existing until he became old enough to escape. He was a piece of shit teenager that made his mother regularly cry, no matter how many times they threatened to send him back to the re-education camp in arizona, and his parents finally gave up on the moment he officially decried the holy ghost. Within a year, he was kicked out (though bill thought of it more as a mutual decision). Leaving home, he surfed a few ex-mormon couches and slept on the streets for a few nights, before he ultimately ended up on las vegas. There, he met a los lobos locos member, and it wasn’t long before he realized this was what he was meant to do: sin. Perhaps crime was a better word for it, but it was all the same to Bill. he saw the money, the girls, the drugs that the lobos had, and he wanted that too. He wanted to be a lobos. He wanted to be the wolf.

He became a lobos. It was a hard, violent process, like any gang initiation. It was sort of strange, how he hated growing up in organized religion, just to join a criminal organization. Bill could pray to the god of kalashnikovs with serial numbers filed off and seedy nightclubs bought with dirty money. He could wash and anoint himself in blood if he had to. There was very little that bill would not do for the lobos, even spending three years and a separate eight months in prison for them. It took him almost twenty years to reach the top, and he still wasn’t running the show. he hadn’t actually wanted that, he didn’t think. He had been very comfortable in his station, living in a beautiful west hollywood penthouse and earning money he didn’t deserve (and couldn’t claim on his taxes!).

So, yes, he was a sinner. He made sure to sin every day, which was admittedly a little hard to do in a microsociety based out of a casino hotel. So his sins were small in scale, little naughty deeds like hiding someone’s shirt or sneaking a bit of someone’s rations. He almost reverted into a child in church, making faces at the bishop during sacrament or sneaking a cookie before dinner. They were minuscule compared to the sins of his adulthood: racketeering, credit card scams, gun trafficking, even a few instances of murder. They were small in scale, but they were still sins in the eyes of heavenly father, and that was what mattered. It made it so his eschewing of his parents was not in vain. He was a sinner, and he made sure everyone knew it.

He laughed at her question, so pretty and so unbearingly stoic. He was used to women fawning over him, in all sorts of ways and all types of women, but they all had one thing in common: they bought his bullshit. Tovah was a wall that refused to fall. “Yeah, well, i just don’t want anyone to get the wrong idea. I’m not a good guy, and I never have been.” Was that not obvious in the way he treated her little brother? Not every single woman that bought his bullshit thought they could fix him, but most did. Most tried. And failed. “It’s easier to be upfront about it.” bill was a powder keg looking for a spark–he didn’t know how long he’d last in the flamingo before it all inevitably went up in flames. The people of the casino were weak, as were a lot of the californians, but his initial group had a salvation: they knew how to survive outside if they had to. When he was to eventually leave, and it was eventual, he would allow any of his former group to come along with him as long as they could keep up. And serena, too, obviously. He may have severed the bond with his mother and father, and while it was a tenuous bond with his sister, she was his sister. She’d listen to him, in the end, she’d come with him. He hoped tovah would too. “What about you? Was there ever a time when you weren’t completely in control of your emotions? Have you ever sinned, tovah?”

[frithwontdie]

Exactly! There's tons of videos of that. Plus, according to the Bureau of Justice stats. (Before they removed asian-Americans as victims of interracial crimes). It states that there were 182,230 cases of interracial crimes against asians. As we can see, blacks are responsible for 28% of the crimes. Whites Are responsible for 24%.

Doing the math:

White people- 182,230 × 24% =43,735 or 46%

Black people- 182,230 × 28% = 51,024 or 54%

Blacks are responsible for more attacks on Asians than Whites. The only reason they pushed the whole Stop Asian Hate, was because it was used to blame only white people. Only when they realized it was blacks were responsible for most of it, then they dropped it and/or try to blame White supremacy. Plus, they wouldn't say the race of the individuals if they were any other race but white.

Also I say God Bless roof Koreans. Korean Americans are the one Asian group that get targeted by blacks than any other group. But media tends to ignore it. It's been going on the years.

The rate of victimization of Black on Asian violent crime is 280 TIMES HIGHER than Asian on Black crime. By raw number of incidents, it is 89 times higher.

As you can see from the statistics, Black on Asian crime is a huge problem. Unfortunately the popular western media doesn’t like this narrative.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Noah Carl

Published: May 10, 2023

Since the death of Jordan Neely on the New York subway, there has been much discussion of interracial violent crime on Twitter. Conservatives have been pointing out (correctly) that blacks commit a disproportionate amount, while leftists have been trying to argue (erroneously) that they don’t.

The latest attempt to show that blacks don’t commit a disproportionate amount of interracial violent crime was by a guy named Judd Legum, whom I’d never heard of before. Here I’ll explain exactly why he’s wrong.

Note that Legum has a Substack newsletter with 258,000 subscribers, of which more than 10,000 are paying subscribers. This equates to a minimum annual income from Substack of around $600,000 (minus fees). So this guy is earning hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, despite the fact that he’s making completely erroneous claims about an important subject. What’s more, his newsletter previously won an award for “online journalism”.

Legum made several erroneous claims in his recent article but I want to focus on this one: “when you normalize the data for population, the rate of “Black on White” crime is similar to the rate of “White on Black” crime”. To support the claim, he refers to a table in a report by the US Department of Justice – which is reproduced below.

[ Table from ‘Criminal Victimization, 2018 ]

As Legum notes, “The data shows that 15.3% of crimes against whites are committed by Black people. And 10.6% of crimes against Black people are committed by whites.” Since 15.3% is not that much greater than 10.6%, he’s claiming that blacks and whites commit a “similar” amount of interracial violent crime.

Here’s what’s actually going on.

3,581,360 is the total number of violent incidents with a white victim. Of these, 15.3% had a black perpetrator. This means the total number of violent incidents committed by blacks against whites is 3,581,360 × 0.153 = 547,948.

563,940 is the total number of violent incidents with a black victim. Of these, 10.6% had a white perpetrator. This means the total number of violent incidents committed by whites against blacks is 563,940 × 0.106 = 59,778.

Dividing 547,948 by 59,778 gives us 9.2. Which means the total number of violent incidents committed by blacks against whites is 9 times greater than the total number of violent incidents committed by whites against blacks.

If we compare blacks and Asians, we get an even bigger disparity. In fact, the total number of violent incidents committed by blacks against Asians is 89 times greater than the total number of violent incidents committed by Asians against blacks.

These massive ratios have nothing to do with the population sizes of different groups. Although there are more whites than blacks in the US, there are more blacks than Asians. Yet both whites and Asians commit many fewer violent incidents against blacks than blacks commit against them.

Adjusting for population size by calculating “rates”, as some conservatives have been doing, is actually wrong in this context. To see why, consider the following example – which I borrowed from the Twitter user Lao Yang.

[ Image made by Twitter user Lao Yang. ]

First, let’s check that both populations have the same overall crime rate.

The total number of crimes committed by members of population A is 9,801 + 99 = 9,900. (9,801 crimes were committed against other members of population A and 99 were committed against members of population B). Therefore, population A’s crime rate is 9,900/990,000 × 100 = 1 per 100.

The total number of crimes committed by members of population B is 99 + 1 = 100. (99 crimes were committed against members of population A and 1 was committed against another member of population B). Therefore, population B’s crime rate is 100/10,000 × 100 = 1 per 100.

So both populations have the same overall crime rate. And each committed the same number of crimes against the other. Why, then, is it wrong to calculate “rates” of interracial crime?

Well, we can calculate both offending rates and victimisation rates. Population A’s offending rate is 99/990,000 × 100 = 0.01 per 100. And population B’s offending rate is 99/10,000 × 100 = 0.99 per 100. So population B’s offending rate is 99 times higher.

Now let’s do victimisation rates, which are exactly the same. Population A’s is 99/990,000 × 100 = 0.01 per 100. And population B’s is 99/10,000 × 100 = 0.99 per 100. So population B’s victimisation rate is also 99 times higher.

Population B commits crime against population A 99 times more often than population A commits crime against population B. Yet population B is victimised by population A 99 times more often than population A is victimised by population B? This can’t be right.

The reason is that interracial crimes involve encounters. And the number of times blacks encounter whites has to be equal to the number of times whites encounter blacks. Therefore, interracial crime numbers do not need to be adjusted for population. (You could adjust them for the combined population of both groups, but that would be pointless.)

In summary: comparing interracial crime across groups is relatively simple. You just divide, say, the total number of crimes committed by blacks against whites by the total number of crimes committed by whites against blacks. Doing so confirms that blacks commit a disproportionate amount. Age can explain part of the disparity between blacks and whites, and an even smaller part of the disparity between blacks and Asians.

[ladyluscinia]

I've already expressed that I think people who read Izzy as a clearly racist / homophobic villain are setting themselves up for disappointment - doubly so if they are throwing around "irredeemable" or expecting he'll be harshly punished somehow - because the show is simply... not that kind of show.

But I've also decided they are just plain missing out on good writing.

Just in general, do you know what standard straight romcom couples pretty much never have to deal with? Extreme bigotry as a major obstacle to their relationship. It's not a normal thing to, say, set up an interracial couple and then have one particular character constantly around spouting segregation era views because that's a slap in the face you don't need in a romcom. If a story does go that way it's pretty much exclusively a brief, "oh shit did they just go there?" moment, kills the lighthearted tone immediately, and leads directly to a huge climactic explosion because, again, slap in the face.

So why should Stede and Edward have to face seasons of explicit homophobia and racism (without even a cathartic explosion up front) for the crime of being a non-standard romcom couple? They shouldn't! Canon gay couples deserve to get the romance and the lighthearted tone without having to run through a required Homophobia Exists obstacle course. At the same time, though, that can be kinda difficult writing-wise because homophobia does exist.

And the OFMD writers were actually really fucking smart about it!

Like, as people have pointed out around Izzy, any character being hostile to a gay couple is going to ping homophobia radars, because in reality that is a likely explanation. Same for insulting gay characters based on their appearance or manner (so... the basis of most insults?). This means you probably can't just copy the obstacle characters from a straight romcom and play them out the same way - they would just read as homophobic without ever saying it out loud - but also you need obstacle characters for a lot of the romcom beats. So instead of doing that, they wrote Izzy reasons for his behavior that make sense.

Setting up one of Stede's primary character flaws (and a major theme of the show) as his unconscious class privilege, and then dropping in an aggressively working class guy as the main onscreen antagonist? That's brilliant. Izzy can insult and despise his clothes, his manners, his very existence in the world, and not only does it work, but it's also sympathetic and fixable and crucially based on a real flaw of Stede's. Making him hate Stede for something Stede has actually "done wrong" makes it more difficult to slip into a mindset where a neutral reason (like finding him annoying or something) is just disguising a bigoted one. And then making him hate the relationship because Stede, who he hates, is stealing Edward, who he is in love with? Classic romcom trope AND another clever sidestep of more serious and less sympathetic motivations.

The show is fantastically pulling off getting a man to hate a gay man and a gay romance for realistic, messy, straight out of a romcom reasons entirely unrelated to them being gay, and a bunch of people are STILL obsessed with proving that, no, it's definitely irredeemable, awful, "I'll kill you for being yourself" violent homophobia at work. Why not just consider the alternative?