[ SECRET POST #6841 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6841 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 41 secrets from Secret Submission Post #977.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

The messy part is about statistics like, for example, how black people are more likely to be violent per capita (or Arab people, in Europe, who are also vastly overrepresented) so you could just as well use statistics to be racist because "well black people are more likely to hurt me".

[(Anonymous)]

The possibility that some people might make bad faith arguments doesn't alter the fact that the majority of violent crimes against women are committed by men, so being cautious around men isn't an irrational choice.

[(Anonymous)]

Neither is being cautious around black people then.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

I'm cautious around all dudes, regardless of race. It's almost like universally, across the board, time and, space, men of all races treat women like shit and are a danger to them. This is indisputable fact and no amount of "but muh 13/50" is gonna change that.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

That's a lie though. It's good to be cautious, but not every man that you meet wants to rape or murder you. There are good people in the world and not all of them are women. Believing otherwise is bigotry like anything else.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

No it's not. It's prudence. Did you make this same argument when women overwhelmingly chose the bear?

[(Anonymous)]

DA

Don't ignore the point. Statistics are generally used to tilt against anything anyone wants them to. Men aren't evil just as much as black people aren't. Blindly believing one statistically proves you believe the other, so which one is it?

[(Anonymous)]

DA

Neither. You just told us you don't understand statistics.

[(Anonymous)]

DA but I feel you are the one who doesn't really understand statistics. Saying you are right to mistrust a certain group of people because it's statistically proven that they are more likely to be violent doesn't suddenly become invalid because you feel like doing it to certain demographics is suddenly "in bad faith".

[(Anonymous)]

No, dude. You can't just look at numbers and take them on faith, but you also have to look at what the numbers CAN actually tell us. The statistics on black vs white CAN tell us that black people are targeted for arrest. The statistics on men vs women CANNOT tell us. It cannot be that women commit most of the violent crimes.

You don't understand statistics and this is a false equivalency.

[(Anonymous)]

Men ALSO get targeted for arrest arrest more than women in situations that are ambiguous (like domestic abuse situations).

[(Anonymous)]

No, men get let off more often for domestic abuse. The stats are very clear on that. The amount of women who report domestic abuse is way higher than men arrested for it. Especially since a lot of cops are domestic abusers; the cops are more likely to say she was asking for it.

[(Anonymous)]

In cases where women were the perpetrators, men still get arrested over women.

[(Anonymous)]

But women are perpetrators much less than men. Statistically men commit the crimes more than women, so I would fucking hope we see more men arrested for it over women. Men are still under-represented in arrests for the amount of domestic violence they commit. That's how the numbers work.

[(Anonymous)]

And Arab men are much more likely to be involved in knife crime and gang rapes in Europe and most would still think it would be racist to say "gotta be extra cautious of them Arabs".

[(Anonymous)]

You're doing the false equivalency again. We've been over this. Go sit in a corner and think about it.

[(Anonymous)]

No I'm not. YOU were the one who said "UHM well actually cops are often domestic abusers" - so what, cops, in your opinion, are more likely to be domestic abusers? And that can be counted in the "gotta be extra cautious about them" game but Arabs and black people can't?
You're the one doing the major double standards dance here, hun, and maybe you should look in the mirror before telling others to sit in a corner and think about it because you for sure need to do this yourself.

[(Anonymous)]

"so what, cops, in your opinion, are more likely to be domestic abusers?"

....they are. Dude.
https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2017R1/Downloads/CommitteeMeetingDocument/132808

"And that can be counted in the "gotta be extra cautious about them" game but Arabs and black people can't?"

And this is why I say you know shit about statistics. WHO THE COPS ARREST leads to the statistics on people who are arrested for violent crimes. If the cop thinks that black people commit more crimes they will arrest more black people and prove the stats true. Guess what stat can't be messed with. MEN COMMITTING CRIMES. Unlike with race there are only two options (apologies to the non-binaries, but y'all don't even come up to a rounding error) and the people being arrested are the ones the cops actually care about. Because, as I've shown above, cops are more likely to be domestic abusers themselves (40% vs 10%), and we don't even need to go into the evidence that has been right in front of our eyes for decades of how the cops love to bring violence down on anyone they can get away with.

You're a goddamned idiot.

[(Anonymous)]

Nope you're the idiot. You keep going the double standard route and don't even notice it, that's how dumb you are. You say "Uh. but but but the statistics don't count in YOUR example, but when I want to prove COPS are more likely to be abusers they TOTALLY count". Damn you're stupid AND hypocritical.

[(Anonymous)]

Of the two of us, only I have provided an actual data source. At this point I have to assume you're a troll. I have better things to do than waste my time on an idiot who can't even understand how numbers work. Good luck not being taken advantage of by every con artist who calls.