| |
|
potus, simply because someone brings up a (traditionally) non-white, non male point of view does not by its nature mean that someone is trying to denigrate YOUR point of view. I'll never understand why people think this. To be straight, white, and male obviously is neither good nor bad; it merely IS. But, you must admit, historically the straights, the whiteys AND the males have had a little more than their fair share of the floor, and I think to add some other perspectives to the mix can only be a good thing. Would you disagree? (You certainly can if you want to.)
I guess some of the things that pose a little discomfort for me in your post are the presupposition that one can change one's behavior in order to avoid being hassled by the cops.
quote:
Yes appearance/sexuality will come into that but much like a job interview, appearances can change the manner in which you're treated. Is it fair - maybe not or maybe so because everyone gets treated in the same way.
The thing that keeps roaming around in my behavior with this idea is the crime many African American males commit here in the States: "Driving While Black." It is a known fact that more black and brown people get pulled over by the police in this country than white people.
(and you can check it out
here,here, and here if you like. )
Now, I say to you, which you behavior would you like African-Americans to change?
1: Being Black?
or
2: Driving?
I agree with you that incidents such as the above need to be reported. And I would argue that incidents such as the above ARE being reported - BUT SUCH INCIDENTS ARE STILL HAPPENING!
I'm not saying you don't have a point in terms of "behavior" and "street smarts," I'm just saying it's a little unfair to expect everyone to be able to fit under the same banner that you can.
quote: the right to free speach and protest does not allow you the right to flaunt the law and act without recrimination. Where sexuality, colour of hair or other personality traits come into that is beyond me, feel free to explain.
I think you've all ready explained yourself on this one: quote:In instances of violence, abuse, personal theft and the like, acting like a stoner, a flaky queen who doesn't know how to avoid trouble is going to invite a degree of cynicism.
You've kind of betrayed your own prejudices here. Do you equate being "a stoner" with being gay? And how exactly does one define "flaky" in an objective manner? Are those who are straight and better-able to answer questions in thoughtful, straight-forward manner more entitled to adequate police protection than others? And what does that say about the mentally disabled? Or those who simply need a little time to process and provide information? (I know I do, but once I've processed I can provide information pretty darn well).
That statement just reminds me of the Pink Floyd line, "There's one smokin' a joint! And another with SPOTS! If I had my way/ I'd have all of you SHOT!"
Potus, I'm sincerely NOT trying to antagonize you, but I am trying to have a dialogue with you. With all due respect, I think that are some gray areas that aren't covered by the black and white solutions you propose. |
|
|
