Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jesus what have I done!!

To clear it all up, she is white and english! Said she was from Kent...Im not sure though!


And thanks for the support...I am only trying to make people aware of her. Shes in your face and looking in your door before you know it! She was asking us if we had a computer, how much rent we pay, how many people we live with... very clever for someone who comes across as a victim of society!


And i think she was in our garden because she could see the door was open. Be careful! :)

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> northlondoner Wrote:

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

> -----

> > What race was she? Seems important to mention

> race

> > on here when the miscreant is black . Just

> asking,

> > like.

>

> Give it a rest mate, people aren't interested in

> the chip on your shoulder.


I think that these threads give so much insight into the attitudes in ED. Am amazed that no-one has objected to her gender being identified - after all isn't that sexist according to the 'logic' of some of the posters here???


OF COURSE it is relevant to identify someone's ethnic origin and gender when you wish to describe them amidst a potentially huge group of people. They are the quickest and least changeable identifiable characteristics and the swiftest initial way to narrow down a group of people to hone in on one individual - which is the whole purpose of describing someone in a thread like this.


No-one is suggesting (not that I have seen anyway) that a person is dodgy BECAUSE they are black or female - it is other behaviour by the person that has aroused suspicion. However, an immediate and effective way to hone down a description if you want to let others be alert to a particular person is to start with gender and race, then move on to other less distinctive and potentially changeable characteristics such as hairstyle, clothing etc. To claim that such descriptions are implicitly racist is absurd.

And I was waiting for a couple of well-known posters to pop-up, bang on time - and demand confirmation that the woman was black - assuming that Emser was being too PC to say.


As it is, the fact that the woman is white confirms Northlonder's perfectly reasonable point. Thread hijacking or not - if you can't make that point here, when it's evident, when can you make it?!


Is it so difficult - for people to try and understand the implication of 'black' always being mentioned as a crime topline descriptive, but not so 'white'?! Take a few minutes and think it through!

Surely the identification issue is relatively simple to understand - we pick out those aspects of identity which make an individual stand out from the crowd - so in a predominantly white area (such as ED, which, cosmopolitan as it feels must be over 50% white), being black, or Asian etc. is 'unusual' - as would be non-natural hair colouring, facial hair, unusual height (tall or short) or weight and so on. If I was assailed by a white assailant, medium height and build, I might pick on hair colour, or clothing, or accent, or whatever to narrow down an identification - choosing whatever did make him, or her, stand out from the norm. If I lived in an African suburb however whiteness, being (relatively) unusual, would be an immediate thing I would record. This isn't (necesarily) about race but about identification.


Race is where I write (but I won't) - 'My attacker was black, of course...'

Jesskat... Yes this was straight after she was in our garden. Myself and partner went for a walk just to park across the road (Goose Green) but stopped on a bench to watch her. They were obviously your bins she was rummaging through, and then later went over to the two guys on another bench.

She told us she has a partner who does/ or has done some gardening. There is a guy on our street who sometimes carries buckets and other bits, blond/red hair tied in a ponytail, denim jacket. I think this could be her partner.


penguin68... You are probably right! As a white girl with brown hair, and her being the same, I suppose I only picked out the things that where not the norm for myself! I dunno where this whole race thing has come out of!

OMG she is not mentally unwell, she is just on drugs!

And I actually had the Police around yesterday because somebody was lingering in my back yard at midnight last night, and I mentioned her to them, and they know her very well!

You cannot just brand every drug addict with a mental illness!

the-e-dealer Wrote:

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

> Here you are then I object to her being

> identified as a woman. Feel Better now? Oh yeah I

> think its implicitly racist.



What exactly is "implicitly racist"? Giving an accurate description of a potentially anti-social or criminal person in the area? What is "implicitly racist" about that? In order to avoid being "implicitly racist" should a poster warn others that there is someone in the area acting rather strangely that they should perhaps be alert for, yet choose to exclude from their description important identifying elements just in case it ruffles someone's PC feathers?


I am sure that there are some people who might harbour the attitude that it is inevitable that criminal elements will be from certain ethnic groups, yet there will be others who mention the race of the person behaving strangely simply to give a complete description. There are a number of posters on here who seem to take the default position that anyone who mentions the race of a person acting suspicously inevtably falls into the former group. Perhaps they might benefit fro entertaining the possibility that there are many whose motivations are inspired by the second category.

I have a Northern Irish accent. If I was acting strangely in the local neighbourhood (e.g. calling house-to-house on some dubious pretext) and someone posted that there was someone with an Ulster accent making suspicious house calls, I would not assume that this was anti-Irish prejudice. I would merely assume that someone wished to give as accurate a description as possible to differentiate me from other people and that my national origin as revealed by my accent was a highly relevant way to do this.

emser Wrote:

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

> OMG she is not mentally unwell, she is just on

> drugs!

> And I actually had the Police around yesterday

> because somebody was lingering in my back yard at

> midnight last night, and I mentioned her to them,

> and they know her very well!

> You cannot just brand every drug addict with a

> mental illness!


Addiction is considered a form of mental illness.

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • Exactly what I said, that Corbyn's group of univeristy politics far-left back benchers would have been a disaster during Covid if they had won the election. Here you go:  BBC News - Ex-union boss McCluskey took private jet flights arranged by building firm, report finds https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3kgg55410o The 2019 result was considered one of the worst in living memory for Labour, not only for big swing of seats away from them but because they lost a large number of the Red-wall seats- generational Labour seats. Why? Because as Alan Johnson put it so succinctly: "Corbyn couldn't lead the working class out of a paper bag"! https://youtu.be/JikhuJjM1VM?si=oHhP6rTq4hqvYyBC
    • Agreed and in the meantime its "joe public" who has to pay through higher prices. We're talking all over the shop from food to insurance and everything in between.  And to add insult to injury they "hurt " their own voters/supporters through the actions they have taken. Sadly it gets to a stage where you start thinking about leaving London and even exiting the UK for good, but where to go????? Sad times now and ahead for at least the next 4yrs, hence why Govt and Local Authorities need to cut spending on all but essential services.  An immediate saving, all managerial and executive salaries cannot exceed and frozen at £50K Do away with the Mayor of London, the GLA and all the hanging on organisations, plus do away with borough mayors and the teams that serve them. All added beauracracy that can be dispensed with and will save £££££'s  
    • The minimum wage hikes on top of the NICs increases have also caused vast swathes of unemployment.
    • Exactly - a snap election will make things even worse. Jazzer - say you get a 'new' administration tomorrow, you're still left with the same treasury, the same civil servants, the same OBR, the same think-tanks and advisors (many labour advisors are cross-party, Gauke for eg). The options are the same, no matter who's in power. Labour hasn't even changed the Tories' fiscal rules - the parties are virtually economically aligned these days.  But Reeves made a mistake in trying too hard, too early to make some seismic changes in her first budget as a big 'we're here and we're going to fix this mess, Labour to the rescue' kind of thing . They shone such a big light on the black hole that their only option was to try to fix it overnight. It was a comms clusterfuck.  They'd perhaps have done better sticking to Sunak's quiet, cautious approach, but they knew the gullible public was expecting an 24-hour turnaround miracle.  The NIC hikes are a disaster, I think they'll be reversed soon and enough and they'll keep trying till they find something that sticks.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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