Prejudice - Walking down a city street, seeing 2 black kids dressed like they're in a gang, being scared.

Racist - Walking down a street, seeing two black men in decent suits and briefcases, thinking they are probably defence lawyers for gangs.

Prejudice - Finding out the white guy you just hired goes to AA meetings, so you fire him before he shows up drunk.

Racist - A theft happens at your store, so you first check the black girl's handbag, even though she says it was Cindy, the blonde with the nice ass.

Prejudice is hardwired into the human psyche. The term "intuition" is just prejudice with coating of deodorant.

Racism requires generalization. You have to have a unwarranted view of the majority of a race to be racist.

Prejudice can exist without racism. Racism on the other hand MUST contain prejudice.

It's also entirely possible the cops got a call about a "good ol' boy tea bagger trying to cause shit by standing up for his rights", and then later some scared granny calls in about "some goddamn Al Quesadilla terrorist wanting to shoot up the Walmart!!!"

Police response for each would be different, no matter what the colours were.


A good experiment would be for the white guy walking around with a fully capable AR15, then show a black guy walking the same area with a fully capable, CLEAR PLASTIC AirSoft rifle...

...betcha the same damn thing would happen.

Erm, I'm a fucking Australian and even I remember...

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Thomas Jefferson

And for all those people saying "He shouldn't have done that because it's not safe", you do comprehend that you're proving the case these guys are trying to make right? You're openly admitting that the black guy was in grave danger as soon as he walked out in the open with that gun hanging off him, just because he was black.

Not a single comment expressing concern for the safety of the white guy for doing the exact same thing because you all assume that he's a lot safer doing it, right? \= |

If the social experiment of actually taking the gun out and seeing how the cops react isn't legitimate enough, the reaction of posters confirms the results emphatically.

I wish they had treated the white guy the same as the black guy. Open carry in city limits should be probable cause.

I would share the knee-jerk outrage right on cue if it was the same cop in both situations. How do you know the first cop wouldn't treat the black man the same way, by walking up and talking to him? How do you know the second cop wouldn't pull his gun on the white guy in the first scene? How do you know whether there wasn't a report of a robbery in the vicinity of the 2nd scene? The first video apparently was taken in Oregon, I can’t tell what county is displayed on the police cars in the 2nd video, much less what state they are in. So I must assume there are logistical reasons why the creators of this video would not have been in the position to insert the black man into the original scenario, for it to actually qualify as a “social experiment”. I know these comments wouldn't easily fit on a picket sign, so that must mean I'm for racism (he said sarcastically).

He's a white guy, so I'm assuming they didn't shoot him on sight. So what happened?

I think at least a couple parts of his premise are illogical. For example, no matter how liberal the presenters, or whatever label you want to paste on, it doesn't mean that say 'the white guy' isn't the best actor. I do like that he points out that none of us are perfect and just because we don't want to be a certain way doesn't mean that we can't be a little. I see these and most things as continuums. So you have balls out racist on one end and barely racist on the other. If you're striving to get to the far end then I think you're doing a good job as a human. Same goes for homophobia, sexism, ...

Your video, If Asian Women Hit On White Guys the Way White Guys Hit On.., has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

No, there is a world of difference between having a responsibility for your plight and choosing how you respond.

The correct response to being assaulted, robbed, or otherwise offended against, is never to bow down to what your attackers want. You can apply this logic to all kinds of situations.

Don't want cat calls? Don't wear a sexy outfit.
Don't want to be gay bashed? Don't go into the rural south.
Didn't want to be shot? Shouldn't have published those cartoons.

FUCK

THAT

SHIT

But funnily enough, no-one ever tells a white guy that if he didn't want to be car-jacked, he shouldn't be driving that corvette.

It's pretty fucking awful that the assholes who stole the photos manage to be both puritan and lecherous at the same time. Telling the woman she's a slut for posing naked whilst masturbating to the images. It's the height of hypocrisy.

And meanwhile, you have a bunch of guys telling her what she should or shouldn't do in the privacy of her own home.

@Lawdeedaw - what's the source on that statistic? No need for a pre-emptive strike, you might want an argument but i just want information. All the other statistics have reasonable sources. In fact, i think some of those sources are in contradiction with what you say RE: the disparity.

In particular, the point @Asmo and the videographer made about the system being balanced in favour of equivalent white crime? In other words - if the statistic is reliable, what method do you use to claim that it "significantly" addresses the disparity? It's not easy to unravel the socio-economic factors and the inherent bias of the system in order to prove your point... I think it's pretty self evident that a white guy dealing coke in the bathroom of a wall street office has a pretty big positional advantage over a black guy selling crack from the ghetto. The black guy might do it in the open because crackheads in the ghetto aren't too fussy, but the cokeheads on wall street damn well don't want their dirty business known.

I'm willing to believe what you say, but you haven't done anything to prove or give confidence to it.

Hm, in the original video, the woman gets "harassed" by blacks and latinos but there weren't enough white guys flirting with her (thereby angering many people on the left).

Here, however, there's a multicultural and a multigender aspect to the people flirting with and teasing (i.e., "harassing") the drag queen. I wonder how the social justice warrior liberals are going to try to spin this...

Did you miss the part where I quoted trance saying she should wear earbuds?

Also please quote the part where I said "there should be stricter limits on their speech". For what seems like the 7 millionth time, freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences of speech. These guys are free to make comments on her ass or whatever, and I am free to call them misogynist assholes for doing so.

And this whole thing about class and race is a bullshit smokescreen, by men desperate to paint this as anything other than what it clearly is.

Here's Jessica Williams talking about being harassed by "wall street douches". So that's a black woman being harrassed by rich white guys.

Still think it's about how "dark skinned men might rape your white woman"?

Meanwhile, tranceidiot is desperately trying to somehow make this about his retarded libertarian agenda.