break-in(?)

@Bringmemyfix - Well said. EEI - thank you too. Life is incredibly tedious when you're on the receiving end of the stereotypes.

I was commenting on the only descriptor used about the intruder

While this is a majority white country, the fact of somebody being black is noticeable, so it is not necessarily racist to report what was likely the most striking feature of the intruder. It's not about drawing conclusions from race, it's about reporting first impressions, which are inevitably dominated by the things which make the circumstance different from the norm. Had the burglar been naked, one would expect that to be reported ahead of skin colour, since naked is more unusual than black under the circumstances.

If you saw this fellow at a Buckingham Palace garden party, you'd probably first notice that he's black, whereas on Brighton's naturist beach the most remarkable thing about him would be the threads.

1 Attachment

Life is incredibly tedious when you're on the receiving end of the stereotypes.

I know. When I go though the estate at night, I fear all the Black boys who will jack me and shank me.
Their mums, on the other hand, fear that lonely weird looking white boy is a rapist. The longer my facial hair the look of panic is more prominent on their faces. What would we become without stereotypes? Apart from a better society...

(...)whereas on Brighton's naturist beach the most remarkable thing about him would be the threads.

I haven't heard that euphemism yet.

meant dreads...

What would we become without stereotypes?

Paralysed by indecision, probably.

meant dreads...

dreads are awsome

meant dreads...

I toyed with the poetry of dreads/threads, but couldn't be arsed to search for a pic of a rasta man in pinstripes.

While this is a majority white country, the fact of somebody being black is noticeable, so it is not necessarily racist to report what was likely the most striking feature of the intruder. It's not about drawing conclusions from race, it's about reporting first impressions, which are inevitably dominated by the things which make the circumstance different from the norm.

I get what you're saying, but disagree. The skin colour of the intruder is irrelevant in the context of reporting the incident on this thread. It serves no purpose, but will have the subconscious effect of reinforcing some people's prejudices. As I said, people need to be mindful of what they say/write/do.

And, for many, someone's blackness is not necessarily 'noticeable', or 'the most striking feature'. Granted, this is more the norm in diverse communities, but FFS, this is London and lfgss, neither of which are monocultural (even regarding the types of bike we ride and discuss).

While this is a majority white country, the fact of somebody being black is noticeable, so it is not necessarily racist to report what was likely the most striking feature of the intruder.

Really? Useful identifying feature, is it? Would it help catch the intruder if reported? No, is the simple answer. The OP's focus on it very possibly means he didn't pick up on genuinely useful identifying features which he would have noticed on a white intruder.

I get what you're saying, but disagree. The skin colour of the intruder is irrelevant in the context of reporting the incident on this thread. It serves no purpose, but will have the subconscious effect of reinforcing some people's prejudices. As I said, people need to be mindful of what they say/write/do.

What you're saying is that, even though skin colour was the most noticed feature of the intruder, the victim should have omitted this from her report on the grounds of political correctness.

While I agree with you and itsbruce that it's both unlikely to be a useful report in the prosecution of the crime and can give a misleading impression of the racial mix of burglars, since IC1 tends to go unreported by virtue of being the default yet it's omission leaves the reader to fill in the blanks based on his own prejudice, I'm against the kind of censorship you advocate, and I reject the proposition that accurate reportage is inherently racist even when it draws attention to the fact of some skin tones but not others.

In the end, the brand image of ethnic minorities will be improved by their achievements in legitimate fields of endeavour and their rejection of criminality, not by censorship and brow-beating of anybody who has the temerity to speak the truth. The stereotype of Chinese-British has been utterly transformed in the last century by exactly this process, with no assistance from po-faced Grauniad readers, who should go back to knitting their own muesli and leave immigrants and their descendants to make their own way in the world.

What you're saying is that, even though skin colour was the most noticed feature of the intruder, the victim should have omitted this from her report on the grounds of political correctness.

I think the point is that she should have noticed something more useful than just the colour of his skin.

The skin colour of the intruder is irrelevant in the context of reporting the incident on this thread.

Oh, I think it served the purpose alright. It supposed to make the whole story more dramatic and believable. The vague mention of the kitchen knife in the final chapter paired with the skin colour of the assailant supposed to fill the reader - already conditioned by the previous reports in "Daily Star" - with fear and sympathy towards the author.

I was broken into once, didn't see the perps, neither did the Police when they turned up 3 hours later.
My passport was stolen, the copper told me that "the young asian kids" were very good at forging documents etc..

In the end, the brand image of ethnic minorities

Ha, ha, you actually said this? The* brand image* of ethnic minorities? They are people you muppet, not a fucking brand.

Oh, I think it served the purpose alright. It supposed to make the whole story more dramatic and believable. The vague mention of the kitchen knife in the final chapter paired with the skin colour of the assailant supposed to fill the reader - already conditioned by the previous reports in "Daily Star" - with fear and sympathy towards the author.

Bang on! I didn't wanna come across cynical since I don't post a lot and don't know anyone here, personally :OD

The* brand image* of ethnic minorities? They are people you muppet, not a fucking brand.

Not yet.

[QUOTE=mdcc_tester;2273280 po-faced Grauniad readers, who should go back to knitting their own muesli and leave immigrants and their descendants to make their own way in the world.[/QUOTE]

But then again you did say this about Guardian readers knitting their own muesli because you don't actually have an original idea in your head and have to rely on pre-fab jokes that weren't even funny the first time.
And by the way, I love the way you assume those Guardian readers are white and not 'immigrants and their descendents'. You should stick to talking about ball bearings.

I did go out once with a guy who was orange he had way to much fake tan for anyone to wear.

When did you date Pisti?

He was being facetious.

.

You're new here right?

dreads are awsome

But whiteys with them are cunts

^Bingo! King of the Guidos

Racist

You should stick to talking balls.

Welcome to the thread. Your contributions are always so insightful and thought-provoking.

Erm, I've been offline. For the record, despite the fact it's a word often used jokingly on this forum, I was being serious.
.

Think you've over reacted a bit especially as the majority of cat burglary's are committed by scruffy little WHITE smack'eads

I think he was using the term 'black' just as a description, to identify, to distinguish. HHHH is Chinese(correct me if I'm wrong) so for him it's just a point of observation.

When did you date Pisti?

Reported