Gross generalisations of any group of people are unproductive and almost always inaccurate, especially pertaining to something as subjective and diverse as religion.

Quote:


Can you provide one example of a blanket generalisation like the one above that is productive and accurate?.

Hey now, that last sentence in brackets was me just foolin' with ya! Enjoy the forums 

Quote:


Sadly, the anecdote reflects the actual total spread of the data available. Blacks indeed are far, far more likely to commit rape (among many other crimes) in the United States than whites-- this information is thoroughly supported by the reports of the Criminal Victim Profile (an enormous, fully representative sample), where victims of crimes are queried on the characteristics of their assailants. Needless to say, the entire matter is not in anyway flattering to blacks (and from the perspective of Asians, not particularly flattering to Whites either).

At this point you will probably retreat to the second line of egalitarian denial; which is to construct a fanciful byzantine police conspiracy in order to explain these disparities in the data. All of this information is actually readily available on official crime statistic web-pages managed by the U.S government, but it is not presented in such a fashion (obviously) to give you the information that you need; you have to piece it together yourself, or read one of the myriad reports by other parties that have actually done so.

If I presented you with the data, would you just instantly retort that I was making it up? Or would you request the source perhaps of the individual that I may have garnered the pertinent information from, proceed to locate some quotation made by a patently unsavoury person in adulation of that individual and then immediately present that as evidence that the data was fabricated? Essentially, there is little to nothing I can do to convince you. I do not have the information memorized obviously, but it can easily be attained for you if you wish.

Which source would you prefer?

The most reputable source, full stop, is the U.S government's crime statistic web pages. This is where all of the germane information on this subject is drawn from. The problem? Well, do you really want to have to sit there constructing your own data-set using the information yourself? I have spent a few hours doing just this; the information from my attempts at constructing limited samples from the archives do not in anyway differ from the parties that have constructed complete reports.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 'reputable'. If you are assuming that the parties who have produced (or rather, collected) the information from the government pages are all a bunch of hood-wearing (because heaven forbid only a racist would point out something self-evident!) cross-burning, celebrated editors for some publication like Spearhead or Vanguard then you are certainly mistaken. If you're naive enough to think that there is a plethora of budding criminologist PhDs out there just itching to publish their disertation on disparities in crime rates between racial groups, then you are simply ignorant to the political climate. Experts don't talk about this stuff (and certainly don't write about it) for a reason; they don't want to lose their jobs or worse. Though I'm sure they all know. Hell, the man on the street knows without the need for access to enormous amounts of police information. The dearth that paradoxically results from this abundance is a matter of mere mokita and nothing more.

Onto the sources..

One of the best sources is the New Century Foundation's excellent Color of Crime. I forgot when it was published, but its creation was just a matter of doing what I attempted to do (to verify said information) up there; going to the U.S crime statistics and piecing together crimes by race and then ranking them. The same pattern, for almost every crime, emerged predictably; blacks always way ahead of any other group, followed (generally) by hispanics, whites, and then finally Asians coming up the rear. One of the primary conclusions was that blacks, as a group, were far more likely than whites to commit crimes than men (of any group) were to commit crimes than women. Indeed, that is what the data showed..

The New Century Foundation I believe was founded by Jared Taylor, a Yale/Sorbonne graduate who interestingly enough used to be somewhat of an egalitarian. He has many detractors from the usual suspects; the ADL, SPLC, etc. but at the same time many admirers even from those who vehemently disagree with him; he is praised for his high sense of liberal fair-play, eloquence, friendliness and a dedication to the quest for truth (how academics used to behave before the progressive epoch). He is also highly controversial (editor-in-chief of the I must remark excellent monthly publication American Renaissance) which you must take into consideration. The 'Color of Crime' is an excellent starting point for anybody interested in uncovering this information.

Another writer courageous enough to discuss these issues at length is Heather MacDonald, an ex-lawyer and Harvard graduate. She has published several works discussing crime disparities at length. She might still write for the City-Journal, but I'm not entirely sure.

The U.S Department of Justice states that 90% of rape victims are assaulted by someone from the same racial background. Statistically, your friend's girlfriend 'should' have been safer at any other university than a predominately white one.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your bigotry.

some comments remotely on topic would be appreciated

Quote:


Wouldn't University attendance cut out a lot of the confounding factors in that statistic?

Quote:


So it relies on your interpretation of statistics? Can you explain your assumptions?

Quote:


It depends on whether you included references or not.

Quote:


So, you claim to have official government statistics to back up your case, but you also claim to be unable to convince anyone with them?

Quote:


I guess I should have made it clear that I was asking for realistic examples.

Quote:


Prejudice stems more often from ignorance than experience.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jan 8^th, 2010 at 8:13pm:



Exactly.  People who have travelled widely are generally the most tolerant.

Quote:


...Obviously.

Quote:


Muso very kindly provided one for me. A decent amount of prejudice comes from fear of the unknown, especially when dealing with culture. Take away the unknown and become familiar, and you'll more often than not find acceptance.

Quote:


Smartass.

Am I allowed to say that here?

Excellent. Thank you, Imperium.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Jan 8^th, 2010 at 8:56pm:



Better than being just an ass.

We are surrounded by social science undergraduates, folks...

freediver wrote on Jan 9^th, 2010 at 12:42pm:




And who might have said that?

freediver wrote on Jan 10^th, 2010 at 5:21pm:



Is that true??