Why do Black men rape White women?

kimmy · August 13, 2009

Say again?

ok:

In 2001, mixed unions represented
3.2%
of all people living in couples in Canada compared with 2.6% a decade earlier.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/0...040608b-eng.htm

With the introduction of the "mixed-race" category, the 2000 census showed interracial marriage to be somewhat further widespread, accounting for 2,669,558 such marriages, or
4.9%
of the total.

(cite for the 4.9% US figure:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_m...reau_statistics )

4.9% versus 3.2% is a significant difference.

If Canadians are so open-minded and cosmopolitan, and Americans are burdened by their historical and cultural baggage, how do you explain the higher percentage of interracial marriage in the US compared to Canada?

-k

benny · August 13, 2009

4.9% versus 3.2% is a significant difference.
If Canadians are so open-minded and cosmopolitan, and Americans are burdened by their historical and cultural baggage, how do you explain the higher percentage of interracial marriage in the US compared to Canada?

-k

In the US, there is a show business industry that requires frequent re/marriages from stars.

JB Globe · August 13, 2009

I'm sorry, were you under the impression I _care_ what you think of my posts?

Considering you care enough to respond to my criticism, I don't think it's a wrong impression.

I admitted no such thing.

My bad, I made a mistake in assuming you knew a thing or two about sociology. You see, when you have two different minority populations in two different countries that have two radically different histories in dealing with those minority populations, IN ADDITION TO the fact that those minority communities are radically different from each other - it's actually considered laughable to try and claim that data on one is applicable to the other.

What I said was that we do not allow statistics to be kept here because of the politically correct zealots like you and your ilk, who know in your hearts that such statistics would demonstrate the same over representation of Blacks as they do in the US.

Those statistics would also demonstrate that whites are over-represented in mass-murders and child molestation - a fact you're completely avoiding dealing with for obvious reasons. God forbid you admit to yourself that the world isn't racially polarized into white folks = good guys & black folks = bad guys

And again for the record, I think that the whole "black/white people commit more gang violence/mass-murders because they're genetically/socially predisposed to do so" argument has as much intellectual maturity and validity as a seven-year-old does on quantum mechanics.

There's more at play than your lazy-ass racial-determinism that manifests itself in you making a gross assumption about a complicated issue that you didn't do your homework on.

It's funny you would call it Idiot Boulevard, because whenever I drive on down this path I get to see the likes of you and Tango and Bush and Cheney jumping up and down gibbering and drooling and screaming insanely.

FYI, smileys = instant fail.

As for the rest - whatever makes you sleep at night.

I can see where you'd think that, I mean, insofar as you try to think about anything, which I know is hard for you.
But in actuality, whenever my posts deal with "visible minorities" it's in terms of crime and immigration, and the interrelationship between them.

So, you're NOT racist - you just only post about visible minorities when you're trying to make the argument that Canadians who are visible minorities are inherently more criminal than Canadians who aren't.

Wow, it's so clear to me now - I can't believe I actually thought you were a bigot.

I know. It always comes down to that sort of argument from the PC police types. Anyone who argues against immigration or crime is always a Nazi.

Congratulations, you just set the MLW record for "most straw men created in a single week"

What's your secret? - Intellectual Laziness? Ignorance? Terrible debate skills?

And just how did you get an exclusive supply deal from all the straw farmers in Leeds & Grenville?

It's funny, but for a Jew, you make a good little PC Fascist.

Really? That's weird - I wasn't old enough to vote for Mulroney.

Edited August 13, 2009 by JB Globe

M.Dancer · August 13, 2009

ok:
(cite for the 4.9% US figure:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_m...reau_statistics )

4.9% versus 3.2% is a significant difference.

If Canadians are so open-minded and cosmopolitan, and Americans are burdened by their historical and cultural baggage, how do you explain the higher percentage of interracial marriage in the US compared to Canada?

-k

Apples and oranges. We have no mixed race stats....to compare apples to apples you have to use the american 2.2% figure.

benny · August 13, 2009

Apples and oranges. We have no mixed race stats....to compare apples to apples you have to use the american 2.2% figure.

Rapists are rotten apples and to compare them, one has to explore their respective superegos.

kimmy · August 13, 2009

Apples and oranges. We have no mixed race stats....to compare apples to apples you have to use the american 2.2% figure.

In Canada, "mixed race" would be included in the "visible minority" group, making the 4.9% statistic the equivalent American figure.

-k

M.Dancer · August 13, 2009

In Canada, "mixed race" would be included in the "visible minority" group, making the 4.9% statistic the equivalent American figure.
-k

How do you conclude that?

Now my math may be off, but from the two links (wiki and G&M) I see that:

In the US, whites in a mixed relationship account for 2.05%

In Canada, the number is 3.38%

benny · August 13, 2009

Now my math may be off, but from the two links (wiki and G&M) I see that:
In the US, whites in a mixed relationship account for 2.05%

In Canada, the number is 3.38%

To really compare people, you need infinitesimal calculus.

kimmy · August 13, 2009

Those statistics would also demonstrate that whites are over-represented in mass-murders and child molestation - a fact you're completely avoiding dealing with for obvious reasons.

Those figures have been pointed out repeatedly in this thread, and have been ignored primarily because they're off-topic, an obvious attempt to deflect the topic (think Dub bringing up the IDF in any thread discussing an atrocity commited by Islamists.)

If you have a genuine interest in discussing those topics, I suggest starting a thread on the subject. It might be interesting to see peoples' reactions. I strongly suspect that the response will be, generally, a shrug. This information is referenced so often that it's more or less trite. You can tune in a US "profiler" type TV show and hear one of those statements every week.

Suggest that whites are more likely to commit certain types of crimes? shrug.

Suggest that blacks are more likely to commit certain types of crimes? controversy erupts.

Even suggesting white men just aren't that interested in black women seems to be upsetting to some people.

Personally I think it's interesting.

-k

kimmy · August 13, 2009

How do you conclude that?
Now my math may be off, but from the two links (wiki and G&M) I see that:

In the US, whites in a mixed relationship account for 2.05%

In Canada, the number is 3.38%

You're right. Mea Culpa.

I guess you've succeeded in clinging to the faint hope that Canada might have different figures, but you've provided little reason to think so.

However, the statistics are certainly applicable to the US, and so the idea that white men seem to have little interest in black women in the United States certainly seems relevant in discussing the racial disparity in the sexual assault statistics.

-k

M.Dancer · August 13, 2009

However, the statistics are certainly applicable to the US, and so the idea that white men seem to have little interest in black women in the United States certainly seems relevant in discussing the racial disparity in the sexual assault statistics.
-k

Now the real stretch is showing how having little romantic interest in black women can be applied to having little interest in raping black women.

Argus · August 13, 2009

Now I would not suggest that the fashion world is any arbireur of beauty, never the less, if you don't know who this is, chances are you think you think a woman's jacket needs ample shoulder pads....
http://www.hellomagazine.ca/profiles/alekwek/alek-wek-pb.jpg

Now just between you and me, she doesn't strike me as white or having european features

You know, I was aware that even as I posted that last post someone would go to the effort of finding black womeno f note to throw up there as if to brandish this as evidence of something. I should have at least amended my post to say - even though it was quite obvious - that I mean in terms of "attractiveness", society finds Black women lacking. Nell Carter might be well known, but she's hardly any kind of sex symbol. And congrats, you can find a model or two who's black, out of how many thousands who are not?

Skin coloration has always been a strong influence in whether one is considered attractive in many cultures, not just ours. I could go out and cite a dozen pages if you really want. Do you really dispute the fact that the blacker the woman, the less attractive she is considered by Black men? Again, I've seen no studies of whether White men differ but I rather doubt it. Most people seem to prefer mating with their own race. I could probably find a list of the 100 or 1000 most downloaded pictures of female celebrities/models on the internet, and I doubt any of them will be black, unless maybe Halle Berry is on it.

Argus · August 13, 2009

Now the real stretch is showing how having little romantic interest in black women can be applied to having little interest in raping black women.

How is that a stretch? If you don't think Black women are attractive you're clearly less likely to want to sleep with one.

M.Dancer · August 13, 2009

How is that a stretch? If you don't think Black women are attractive you're clearly less likely to want to sleep with one.

Because rapists don't usually curl up for a cuddle afterwards. Rape is an assault. I would find it more credible that those who do not like blacks would be more inclined to violate them sexually than those who do like blacks.

In toronto a few years ago there was a serial rapist who was preying upon elderly chinese women. I doubt that it was attraction to them that made him beat the shit out of them and rape them.

Argus · August 13, 2009

My bad, I made a mistake in assuming you knew a thing or two about sociology. You see, when you have two different minority populations in two different countries that have two radically different histories in dealing with those minority populations, IN ADDITION TO the fact that those minority communities are radically different from each other - it's actually considered laughable to try and claim that data on one is applicable to the other.

And yet, somehow, the data IS applicable. Let me get this straight here. You aren't denying that Blacks in the US, in the UK, and in Canada, are involved in violent crime far more often than their numbers in the population warrant, but you're saying it's not sociological it's... what, genetic? You're suggesting Blacks are genetically inclined towards criminal behaviour? I guess that makes YOU a racist.

Those statistics would also demonstrate that whites are over-represented in mass-murders and child molestation - a fact you're completely avoiding dealing with for obvious reasons

Because it's stupid and irrelevent?

And again for the record, I think that the whole "black/white people commit more gang violence/mass-murders because they're genetically/socially predisposed to do so" argument has as much intellectual maturity and validity as a seven-year-old does on quantum mechanics.

And yet, you offer up nothing whatsoever to explain why they are overinvolved in such criminal behaviour. They're poor? You haven't even established that they ARE poor. Nor is it an excuse. Are you saying there's more poor Black people in Canada than there are poor White people? Because damn near every violent urban crime I see which isn't family related seems to come with a picture of a visible minority in the paper.

There's more at play than your lazy-ass racial-determinism that manifests itself in you making a gross assumption about a complicated issue that you didn't do your homework on.

Let's see about that homework business. You've stated that the statistics are invalid, though you have none of your own, not anything else to back that up. You've suggested poverty is involved but have never established the economics of the Black population in Canada. You haven't, in fact, looked up or cited a single thing in support of your frantic efforts to stop all discussion on this issue.

So, you're NOT racist - you just only post about visible minorities when you're trying to make the argument that Canadians who are visible minorities are inherently more criminal than Canadians who aren't.

They do seem to be, which is a reflection on our lousy immigration system.

Wow, it's so clear to me now - I can't believe I actually thought you were a bigot.

I have no need to wonder at why I thought you were a smarmy, intellectually bankrupt PC zealot.

Really? That's weird - I wasn't old enough to vote for Mulroney.

I bet you hate being a Jew more than your Muslim friends hate you for being one.

M.Dancer · August 13, 2009

You know, I was aware that even as I posted that last post someone would go to the effort of finding black womeno f note to throw up there as if to brandish this as evidence of something.

Virtually every popular Black actress/singer who I can think of is has lighter skin/ more caucasian features.

Then think beofre you post something as ridiculous as you did which can be so easily refuted.

that I mean in terms of "attractiveness", society finds Black women lacking.

What patent horseshit

And congrats, you can find a model or two who's black, out of how many thousands who are not?

I can't find any models who are not attractive....but you clearly said, the more black they are the less attractive...refuted, in spades.

Do you really dispute the I could probably find a list of the 100 or 1000 most downloaded pictures of female celebrities/models on the internet, and I doubt any of them will be black, unless maybe Halle Berry is on it.

Great, you can find lists made up by people just a narrow minded and idiotic as yourself. I bow to your superior googling abilities.

Argus · August 13, 2009

Because rapists don't usually curl up for a cuddle afterwards. Rape is an assault. I would find it more credible that those who do not like blacks would be more inclined to violate them sexually than those who do like blacks.
In toronto a few years ago there was a serial rapist who was preying upon elderly chinese women. I doubt that it was attraction to them that made him beat the shit out of them and rape them.

Again, this is almost the cliche'd answer. Rape is a crime of violence and power, not about sex.

Bullshit. Sure, it _can_ be, but often enough it's a crime of opportunity and lust. Sure old ladies get raped. But who are the primary target, who represent the vast bulk of rape victims? Women who are at that age in their lives which society considers to be the most attractive. More than 80% are under 30. When the Bernardos of this world are riding buses at night picking out victims, they're not getting off the bus after a 50 year old overweight Black woman with a moustache, they're following the blonde cheerleader.

Argus · August 13, 2009

Then think beofre you post something as ridiculous as you did which can be so easily refuted.
What patent horseshit

Gee, given this entire discussion has wandered into the area of attractiveness and beauty, pardon me for figuring someone wouldn't post a picture of Nell Carter in an effort to refute what I'm saying.

I can't find any models who are not attractive....but you clearly said, the more black they are the less attractive...refuted, in spades.

You know, it just looks sad when you feel the need to pat yourself on the back and tell yourself what a super job you did in accomplishing nothing. You jumped on the fact I hadn't actually stated in that sentence that I mean women society considers beautiful, to post Nell Carter and think this is a triumph?

You also haven't even actually tried to deny the basic contention made that Black men, and indeed, society in general, seem to not consider darker skinned Blacks with less caucasion features to be that attractive. Instead you're zeroing in on those words and jumping up and down, shooting your fists in the air like you've won a great victory.

Great, you can find lists made up by people just a narrow minded and idiotic as yourself. I bow to your superior googling abilities.

Another way of sneering without actually commiting yourself to something you know damned well is utter bullshit. List of people as idiotic as me? You mean lists of the general public? Or do wise, noble people like you not show up on such lists? No, of course not, because you wouldn't look at a picture of a woman and judge her as attractive or not anyway. You're above that sort of human behaviour. You think all women are equally attractive.

Say it openly. Say that it is your belief there is no such thinking among Black men or society about darker skinned Black women. If you're going to put this much effort into denigrating me and my statements then have the balls, for once, to actually put up a statement and stand behind.

benny · August 13, 2009

So much intimate effusions!

JB Globe · August 13, 2009

And yet, somehow, the data IS applicable. Let me get this straight here. You aren't denying that Blacks in the US, in the UK, and in Canada, are involved in violent crime far more often than their numbers in the population warrant, but you're saying it's not sociological it's... what, genetic? You're suggesting Blacks are genetically inclined towards criminal behaviour? I guess that makes YOU a racist.

Either your reading comprehension is at a 4th grade level, or you're lying. Personally I think you know damn well I never said anything like that. I think you've already read the posts in this thread where I explained the reasons why these facts exist, but it's easier for you to misrepresent what I'm saying than it is to come up with a rebuttal.

Because it's stupid and irrelevent?

Actually it's totally relevant: Your logic that when a group is over-represented in a certain kind of crime, that justifies racial profiling and discriminatory policies to deal with that fact - this should apply to all groups.

Meaning, there should be racial profiling of black folks for gang violence, and YOU should be racially profiled next time a child is found raped and murdered. But of course - as with all proponents of racial profiling - they're only for it when it doesn't affect them. And given that racial profiling and discriminatory policies haven't been proven at increasing overall public safety anywhere, I'm wondering just how you figure any of this is going to work.

And why don't you spell out your solutions anyway? You drop hints here and there about racial profiling, but you're never specific about what you mean.

And yet, you offer up nothing whatsoever to explain why they are overinvolved in such criminal behaviour.

You already read my posts where I explained and responded to this point - stop playing dumb.

You've suggested poverty is involved but have never established the economics of the Black population in Canada.

You know what, I have a source right here, but I actually find it more amusing to hear you suggesting that the black community in Canada ISN'T over-represented at the lower-income level.

They do seem to be, which is a reflection on our lousy immigration system.

As opposed to which country's fantastic immigration system? No really - who should we be emulating?

Our immigration system needs some work of course, but it's our "integration system" that is the real source of this problem.

I bet you hate being a Jew more than your Muslim friends hate you for being one.

You're not a bigot, you just enjoy telling people from minority groups that you know our reality better than they do, because your white mind is superior to ours - right?

Nothing's more hilarious than the hissy-fits white bigots pull when you won't play their "model minority" game.

CANADIEN · August 13, 2009

I bet you hate being a Jew more than your Muslim friends hate you for being one.

Thank you for illuminating us, wise one. I would have never guessed in a million years that failure to be a bigot who would ban from this country anyone not christian/white enough and who laments the good ole days when his school and his neighborough were all white is a sign of self-hatred. :lol: :lol:

Edited August 13, 2009 by CANADIEN

CANADIEN · August 13, 2009

Either your reading comprehension is at a 4th grade level

that's an insult to 4th graders everywhere.

And why don't you spell out your solutions anyway? You drop hints here and there about racial profiling, but you're never specific about what you mean.

Good question. Apart from hinting at closing the immigration door, i still have to read how Argus proposes we deal with the issue.

But then, I have a growing suspicion that the REAL problem for Argus is that they're not white enough, period.

Strangles · August 13, 2009

that's an insult to 4th graders everywhere.
Good question. Apart from hinting at closing the immigration door, i still have to read how Argus proposes we deal with the issue.

But then, I have a growing suspicion that the REAL problem for Argus is that they're not white enough, period.

Already as stated and evidently, Argus is a White Nationalist who believes in the geographical and cultural separation of the races (specifically black in this case).

He will not respond in relation to this topic because he knows what his motives are.

What is the point of arguing with White Nationalists? Have we not argued with them enough? We have argued with them and won, time and time again. We have won so many arguements against them that we have completely discredited them, even in their own homelands.

Truly civilized people of all races know better.

bush_cheney2004 · August 13, 2009

Well, let's be realistic. When men and women meet, who initiates contact 90% of the time?
Sure, there's exceptions (me, for instance. When I first met my former special guy of 6 years, I knew that was what I wanted and pursued it with kim-like vigor.) But it is men doing the "seeking" in the vast majority of cases.

Not any more...that is a dated notion (pun intended). "WSF" seeking "BSM" is very common these days in print and online chat. People can mix and match as they please...and often do.

I know from experience that black men are not at all shy about approaching white women. I see nothing to indicate that white men are as outgoing about approaching black women, and I see nothing to indicate women of any race are very outgoing about approaching men of any race.

Then you just haven't met such individuals. Your sample size is too small.

Because Americans have had this conversation many times (out of necessity, perhaps) while Canadians are terrified of discussing race in any terms other than "paint with all the colors of the wind" type platitudes.

If you say so.....but prolly just more convenient generalization, especially for "white" Canadians.

American data has been referenced repeatedly in this thread due to a complete lack of any equivalent Canadian data.

There are other nations in the world as well....but that wasn't my point at all. America and American data are pervasive here and in other Canadian venues regardless of the topic. I understand that such data is more readily available (using American references and tools), but the potential false premise arises when such data are routinely projected to other populations or data domains.

In God We Trust....all others bring data.