Indian man convicted for "serial raping" American girls

[kimmy]

Imagine my surprise at getting home this evening and finding that BC Chick has been arguing my position while I was out. Thank you, Chick. We don't often agree, but I really admire your objectivity.

Name-calling aside, Kimmy is doing a pretty good job herself in defending her position, IMO. But I would like to add that from an outsider's point of view, I'm with Kimmy on this one. Whether or not I agree with her opinion on either issue, I think she made it clear that you cannot take her statement on a broad issue and apply it to a specific issue.

For example, even though she may or may not believe black men tend to rape a lot of white women, had the fashion designer been black and the model white, she may also be inclined to believe that race was not the deciding factor for the rape and that the power dynamics within the relationship also contributed to the crime.

Thank you. Yes, that is it in a nutshell.

I don't have anything to add, except to repeat what I said earlier about my quote being taken out of context.

I'm not saying she would have thought race was "the deciding factor;" I'm saying, from previous comments, that she would have thought "race was germane to the issue," which is what I've said.

Again. "race playing a deciding factor" is not what I'm referring to; it's race being germane to the topic.

So if you see race as being "germane" to the topic when it's blacks and whites, but not being germane when it's other minorities and whites, if you don't see that as being "contradictory," that's your right. However, I will continue to see it as contradictory.

One isn't "playing semantics" when "race being the deciding factor" and "race being germane to discussing a crime" are clearly two different things. In the first scenario, race is "the deciding factor" while in the other, "race may be a factor/the deciding factor." If you see the two situations as nothing more that "playing semantics," then we'll just have to disagree on that point.

Oh God. Saying "race is the deciding factor" and "race might be a factor," ie: "race is germane to the topic," ARE two different things, whether you can see that or not, whether you "give a crap" or not; so no, I'm not "implying" what you have decided that I'm implying. And I never said she was a "hypocrite." So please stick to what was said, ok?

I already explained to you why using the quote in the context you are using it is dishonest, and you proceed to repeat it 4 more times in the next 4 hours? There's only two explanations for that, and neither speaks very highly for you as a member of this community.

I cited two specific incidents and pointed to a double standard in media coverage, and asked "Why is race so germane to the discussion of one incident, but utterly verboten in the other?" Then I cited two more specific incidents and asked the same question again.

It is also worth pointing out that I never asked that question in regard to the generalized topic of black-on-white rapes in that thread. I asked that question in regard to specific incidents.

It was never intended to be a blanket assertion that "race is germane to the discussion" whenever a non-white person commits a crime against a white person. It was a question of what appears to be a racial double standard in media coverage of inter-racial crime.

Here is the message I wrote, so that people can judge the context for themselves.

-k

[Argus]

Thanks, but I already posted figures from those surveys here. Note that I used percentages of white women raped who were raped by black men and percentages of black women raped who were raped by white men, which shows a different story than your flat-out numbers show. Of course a lot more white women were raped by black men than black women raped by white men because more white women were raped;

Yes, but then again Black men only constitute a small minority of males. If you make up 12% of the population then normally you'd be expected to be responsible for 12% of the crime. On the other hand, given other statistics show that the races generally stick together in terms of dating and marriage, ie most whites date and marry whites, most blacks date and marry blacks, etc., one would think Blacks would, in the normal course of events, be responsible for considerably less a percentage of sexual assaults on whites than their numbers. That does not appear to be the case, however.

but there are years when the numbers show that a higher percentage of black women were raped by white men than white women raped by black men

,

I'd like to see a cite on that, if you please.

Now ... one .... more ... time for your benefit. Those figures aren't for rape; they are for rape, sexual assault, and threats of rape and sexual assault all lumped together.

Granted, but I'm not sure the relevance of the statement.

Furthermore, they are a poll; not "crime statistics." So all of your claims regarding "black women raped/white women raped" are inaccurate.

It's a rather detailed survey on victims by the US Justice Department, not a tabloid poll taken at random, and your attempts to dismiss it are silly.

[Guest American Woman]

If you make up 12% of the population then normally you'd be expected to be responsible for 12% of the crime. On the other hand, given other statistics show that the races generally stick together in terms of dating and marriage, ie most whites date and marry whites, most blacks date and marry blacks, etc., one would think Blacks would, in the normal course of events, be responsible for considerably less a percentage of sexual assaults on whites than their numbers. That does not appear to be the case, however.

Blacks make up 13.4% of the U.S. population and while you claim that "one would think blacks would be responsible for considerably less a percentage of sexual assaults on whites than their numbers," but "that doesn't appear to be the case" is incorrect. Looking at all of the results of the polls from '96 to '05, the percentage of 'whites-by-blacks' is lower than 13.4% in 7 out of the 10 years. But it's not just the percentage of blacks you have to look at, it's also the percentage of whites. There are a lot more white women than black, so if you apply your line of thought to that end of it, it would make sense that more whites would be sexually assaulted than blacks.

But again, I'm going to point out that "sexual assault" can mean anything, and the results include the *threat* of rape or sexual assault. There is no breakdown of the numbers, and how does one even begin to define "the threat of?" One person's perception of "a threat" would be completely different from another person's. Perhaps white women, because of 'myths' surrounding rape and race, feel "threatened" by blacks while black women, in the same exact situation, wouldn't feel "threatened" by whites.

Furthermore, since 'date rape' would be included, we'd have to know if there are more white women dating black men than black women dating white men, if the numbers are even, or if there are more black women dating white men as that knowledge would be pertinent to the results.

So the poll really has to be taken only for what it is, especially since the lack of breakdown in numbers regarding "rape, sexual assault, and threat of sexual assault" really renders it useless in too many regards.

but there are years when the numbers show that a higher percentage of black women were raped by white men than white women raped by black men.

I'd like to see a cite on that, if you please.

The cite is the same poll you have been referring to. In 1996 white-by-black was 8.8% of the total while black-by-white was 13.5% of the totals, and in 2000 both white-by-black and black-by-white were 7% of the totals.

Now ... one .... more ... time for your benefit. Those figures aren't for rape; they are for rape, sexual assault, and threats of rape and sexual assault all lumped together.

Granted, but I'm not sure the relevance of the statement.

You originally used the results of one year's poll to apply to *rape* victims for "every year," yet you don't see the "relevance" that the results are not for "rape," but for rape, sexual assault, and threats of sexual assault? Perhaps only 10% of the results were rape, another 10% were for sexual assault, and the remaining numbers pertain only to the threat of rape or sexual assault, and you're not sure that's relevant?

Furthermore, they are a poll; not "crime statistics." So all of your claims regarding "black women raped/white women raped" are inaccurate.

It's a rather detailed survey on victims by the US Justice Department, not a tabloid poll taken at random, and your attempts to dismiss it are silly.

I'm not dismissing it, but I'm not turning it into something it's not. It's not "crime statistics" regarding rape, or sexual assault, any more than the Gallop Poll, which is "rather detailed" and "not a tabloid poll taken at random" would be a substitute for election results. In fact, it's less accurate because it also includes "threats," and there's no breakdown in that "detailed poll" of the numbers regarding the three areas.

Edited to add one more comment in regards to the poll: The results are for "perceived" race, so some who were "perceived" as black may not have even been black-- so that's just one more ambiguity regarding the poll.

Edited September 7, 2009 by American Woman

[JB Globe]

Wow, thanks for this Lictor, I wasn't aware that white men are genetically incapable of being serial rapists or worse.

I always knew Bernardo's great-great-great-grandfather was a Rajput.

[JB Globe]

It's a fairly cut and dry case of a non-white person, using his "prestige in the fashion industry" to seek and use specifically white females (many of them underage) as his personal toilet

Actually, it's a pretty cut and dry case of a man raping a bunch of girls.

Funny how you skipped over the blatantly obvious gender factor here and went straight to race.

You could have made a bigoted post about how terrible men in general are against women in general . . . but of course you're a man, and then you might be forced by your own logic to deport yourself to save our great Canadian women.