Jump to content

Woman attacked on everthorpe road (Lounged)

Atticus

By Atticus
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gidget

Gidget

Posted
Posted

basher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 'Youths' doesn't mean 'young men'. You're drawing

> an inference about gender based on the

> circumstances described. No doubt you are

> correct. But this shows the importance of

> considering why we choose to use particular words.

> Which I guess is the point being made by Meister.


Yes, it does, esp. in this case. As Lulu said, young people or teens or whatever would have been used instead.

uncleglen

uncleglen

Posted
Posted
Every mugging and/or attack that has been perpetrated on my family members and their friends(and it amounts to many) in the area around Dulwich was carried out by groups of people of the same ethnicity, age and gender! Except for the evening a man exposed himself to my daughter and her friend at the end of Court Lane
JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

meister Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No one mentioned the ethnicity of the female

> victim. Point made.



I think that not mentioning ethnicity could be more racist, as that would assume one if not specifically mentioned as the other depending on statistics.


Why do we want to identify the victim.

Jeremy

Jeremy

Posted
Posted

Glad most people realise that meister is acting like a plonker. It is no more racist than it is "heightist", ageist, or discriminatory against those who tend to hang around in groups of three.


Please can people stop posting such ridiculous fucking nonsense.

DonGee

DonGee

Posted
Posted

tallulah71 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That's awful - poor woman. Makes me sick...

>

> Of course you need to mention their ethnicity as

> an ingtegral part of an accurate description -

> What's the matter with you?

>

> Tall? Short? Ginger? Fat? skinny? Glasses? Black?

> What's the difference? I think they lost their

> rights to 'political correctness' the day they

> chose to kick and punch a lone defenceless woman

> for a handbag.



Well said - I mean if you were giving a witness statement to the police surely you would have to state, colour, sex, height distinctive marks, scars - missing limbs etc... so why do people get their backs up when its mentioned on here, especially colour.

Gidget

Gidget

Posted
Posted

DonGee Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> tallulah71 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > That's awful - poor woman. Makes me sick...

> >

> > Of course you need to mention their ethnicity

> as

> > an ingtegral part of an accurate description -

> > What's the matter with you?

> >

> > Tall? Short? Ginger? Fat? skinny? Glasses?

> Black?

> > What's the difference? I think they lost their

> > rights to 'political correctness' the day they

> > chose to kick and punch a lone defenceless

> woman

> > for a handbag.

>

>

> Well said - I mean if you were giving a witness

> statement to the police surely you would have to

> state, colour, sex, height distinctive marks,

> scars - missing limbs etc... so why do people get

> their backs up when its mentioned on here,

> especially colour.


Thankfully it wasn't people, just meister really, with a bit of support from basher.....off you go meister.

Fabricio the Guido

Fabricio the Guido

Posted
Posted
Perhaps because these descriptions feed into popular stereo-types. Perhaps because a police report is one thing and the forum is another. Perhaps because the demonisation of certain social groups is very prevalent in some societies, some people are rightly concerned about these issues. I wonder about the efficacy of posting these reports on the forum and whether the forum is a part of a crime prevention strategy of some kind.
KidKruger

KidKruger

Posted
Posted

The funny thing here is people (on many threads of this nature) attack OPs and other posters for use of words like 'black', the inference being that the tip of some racist iceberg has been uncovered.

It's pathetic. East Dulwich and it's environs, and the people within that post on here and I meet out and about, are mainly fine people.

It's tiresome to continually see posters hauled-up for, basically, f*ck-all.

Racism, and anything that touches anywhere near it, is a pretty big accusation, so if you think it just come out and accuse someone of it, rather than posturing 'hmm sounds like you're being...', '..could be construed as...' bullsh!t.

No-one's being racist OK ?

KidKruger

KidKruger

Posted
Posted

Oh, and another bit of demographic, that I personally have witnessed (so you can't say is unrepresentative) - the only racism I have ever witnessed in SE22/SE15 has been black on white/asian. It's an observation. I've never seen white on asian or white on black.

By that I mean people picking on other people and using terminology that identifies the target solely by their ethnicity as the chief topic during the interaction.


Why doesn't someone post the term 'white man' on this thread and really push the boat out !?

Michael Palaeologus

Michael Palaeologus

Posted
Posted

meister Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No one mentioned the ethnicity of the female

> victim. Point made.


Just to add to the general message of "you are a pillock"


Nobody is looking for the victim, why do we need to know her ethnicity?

LondonMix

LondonMix

Posted
Posted

First, I want to let the victim know that she has my sympathy and concern and that I hope whoever did this to her is caught and severely punished. Second, I want to say that Atticus acted bravely and I am sure there was no intentional hidden agenda in the post.


BUT Meister is correct even if he /she didn?t express it clearly. Just substitute the description with??A woman was attached by 3 white youths. Call the police if you see them.?- and it should be clear what?s wrong. The first question people would ask is ?what do they look like?? And the reason is 3 white / black youths is not a meaningful description to catch someone. The height descriptions Atticus gave helps, but putting out a call to catch 3 assailants without being able to give more than a very generic description (lacking weight, hairstyle, clothing, precise details of physical appearance) is simply a witch hunt.


If the goal is to warn people to be careful rather than to apprehend (because you didn?t see the attackers well enough to give a meaningful description) then there is no need for any physical description of the assailants at all.


The issue is, without intending to, a generic description like the one provided is basically saying, call the police and or be very careful if you see 3 young black men. That?s what people have an issue with because even though people of certain races and ages and genders commit a disproportionate amount of the local crime, the vast majority of young men and black people don?t and never have and shouldn?t be treated with suspicion or caution as a first response.

Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

Sorry LondonMix, but I disagree.


If somebody reading the OP had seen three young white men of the heights given in the vicinity of the incident at around this time, then they will know that they weren't the attackers.


However if they saw three young black men of those heights in the area at the relevant time, then it's possible that they were the attackers, and they may have information which could help the police, eg to say in which direction they were heading.


ETA: And I believe that if they had been white, then that would have been included as part of the description. However in this case they were black.

Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

jimmyay Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Black youths do nearly all the mugging and robbery

> round here. Sad but true. Not racist to say so.


xxxxxxx


That's not the point.


The point is that in this particular case the attackers were black.


If nobody had seen whether they were black, white or something else then it would be racist to assume that they were black when looking for them, regardless of statistics.


"Nearly all" is far from being the same as "all", and even if it had been "all" you can't extrapolate from that to make an accurate assessment of a new case. You might be able to give a probability, that's all, which obviously would not be sufficient identification.

LondonMix

LondonMix

Posted
Posted

I am not saying that race doesn't belong in the description. Race along with all distinguishing characteristics do. All I am saying is that it only belongs with a full description that is actually able to apprehend someone.


In the hypothetical scenario I mentioned, if the only thing someone saw was that the assailants were young, male and white, they would likely say they didn?t get a good enough look at them to give a description. The same should apply regardless of the race of the attackers for the reasons I have already mentioned.


Jimmyay, I don?t think its racist to acknowledge that a disproportionate amount of the crime is committed by young black men but was that the point of the post? Is that the discussion we are having?


*Edited to reflect the right name

Jeremy

Jeremy

Posted
Posted

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jeremy, I don?t think its racist to acknowledge

> that a disproportionate amount of the crime is

> committed by young black men but was that the

> point of the post? Is that the discussion we are

> having?


You are confusing me with jimmyay.


(and I would like to point out that I don't think that jimmyay's point was constructive in the context of this thread).

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

I tend to here the police use IC1, IC2, IC3 etc as a primary part of their descriptions of criminals.


LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am not saying that race doesn't belong in the

> description. Race along with all distinguishing

> characteristics do. All I am saying is that it

> only belongs with a full description that is

> actually able to apprehend someone.

>

> In the hypothetical scenario I mentioned, if the

> only thing someone saw was that the assailants

> were young, male and white, they would likely say

> they didn?t get a good enough look at them to give

> a description. The same should apply regardless

> of the race of the attackers for the reasons I

> have already mentioned.

>

> Jimmyay, I don?t think its racist to acknowledge

> that a disproportionate amount of the crime is

> committed by young black men but was that the

> point of the post? Is that the discussion we are

> having?

>

> *Edited to reflect the right name

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...