Ontario Teacher's Union holds white privilege workshop

[RW]

Romero, think about it on the flip for just one second.  Say they had a workshop called "Racial Profiling: Black People Really Do Commit A Lot of Crimes".  Would you support that as a "different aspect" from which to discuss the problems within profiling?  I mean, they could be talking about the underlying socio-economic issues that could cause racial profiling.



Helpful or not helpful?

[Renee]

Romero, think about it on the flip for just one second.  Say they had a workshop called "Racial Profiling: Black People Really Do Commit A Lot of Crimes".  Would you support that as a "different aspect" from which to discuss the problems within profiling?  I mean, they could be talking about the underlying socio-economic issues that could cause racial profiling.



Helpful or not helpful?

I doubt Romero wants to discuss the socioeconomic reasons that cause racial profiling. We've had similar discussions like this before and all he does is deny any culpability on the part of blacks and he tries to shuffle the black communities cultural problems under the rug.



Be my guest if you think you can get anything out of him other than the tired old "blame whitey" garbage that has been burned into his brain.

[Romero]

Racial profiling doesn't work



While one of the most common initial responses to racial profiling is a denial that it occurs, there are some who do not deny its existence but rather argue that it does and should occur because it is a useful and appropriate tool to focus limited resources on those who are most likely to be engaged in inappropriate behaviour.



However, there is strong evidence that racial profiling does not work. In fact, where racial profiling has been studied in the context of law enforcement, such as in the United States, it has been found by some scholars to be neither an efficient nor effective approach to fighting crime. Studies in the United States have consistently found that while minorities (African American and Latino persons) were targeted more, the chance of finding contraband when their cars were searched was the same or less than White persons. In several studies, minorities were found to be statistically significantly less likely to have contraband found following a search. For example, a 2001 U.S. Department of Justice report on 1,272,282 citizen-police contacts in 1999 found that, although African Americans and Hispanics were much more likely than White persons to be stopped and searched, they were about half as likely to be in possession of contraband.



These studies have led experts in the United States to conclude that focusing only on one group will likely lead to persons who are committing crimes in other groups, often at the same rates, going unchallenged.



Similarly, when the U.S. Customs Service reformed their search procedures to eliminate racial, ethnic and gender bias in their search activity while instituting stronger supervisor oversight for searches, they were able to conduct 75% fewer searches without reducing the number of successful searches for contraband carrying passengers. And, the hit rates were essentially the same for 'Whites', 'Blacks' and 'Hispanics'. This means that by eliminating racial profiling, the Customs Service was more efficient and equally likely to catch passengers carrying contraband while reducing the number of innocent people who were subjected to the indignity of a search by three-quarters.



In addition to evidence concerning the ineffectiveness of racial profiling, it is also a practice that is logically flawed. Experts point out that even if certain crimes are mostly committed by members of a particular group, it does not mean that a particular person from that group is more likely to have committed a crime. And, even if more crime is committed by a certain group that make up a small percentage of the population, it is still more likely that any given crime will have been committed by someone belonging to the majority group.



In any event, statistics suggesting that a particular group commits a disproportionate amount of crime can often be skewed because of racial profiling itself. If a particular group is stopped more often, even if they are committing less crime than the rest of the population, the fact that they are scrutinized more frequently will result in higher charge rates. This then becomes the justification for profiling. Some scholars therefore argue that, at the end of the day, statistics do not tell the offending behaviour of different races, but rather they measure the actions of the entity engaging in profiling.



Therefore, there is significant evidence that racial profiling is neither an efficient nor an effective practice. And, the discussion that follows shows that racial profiling comes with a huge price tag to individuals, families and communities while negatively impacting the very institutions that practice it.



http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/paying-price-human-cost-racial-profiling/racial-profiling-doesnt-work">//http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/paying-price-human-cost-racial-profiling/racial-profiling-doesnt-work

[RW]

I didn't say anything about racial profiling working or not Ro.  You can't placate me with articles.  I asked a very specific question.  You don't need to weave and dodge, just answer straight up.

[RW]

Romero, think about it on the flip for just one second.  Say they had a workshop called "Racial Profiling: Black People Really Do Commit A Lot of Crimes".  Would you support that as a "different aspect" from which to discuss the problems within profiling?  I mean, they could be talking about the underlying socio-economic issues that could cause racial profiling.



Helpful or not helpful?

I doubt Romero wants to discuss the socioeconomic reasons that cause racial profiling. We've had similar discussions like this before and all he does is deny any culpability on the part of blacks and he tries to shuffle the black communities cultural problems under the rug.



Be my guest if you think you can get anything out of him other than the tired old "blame whitey" garbage that has been burned into his brain.

I'm not even really discussing that.  I am asking if he would support a similarly worded seminar if it related to a different racial issue and that racial issue didn't include whites in the title.

[Romero]

I didn't say anything about racial profiling working or not Ro.  You can't placate me with articles.  I asked a very specific question.  You don't need to weave and dodge, just answer straight up.

I wasn't responding to you. I was responding to Renee. The article was right after her post.

I doubt Romero wants to discuss the socioeconomic reasons that cause racial profiling.

Racial profiling doesn't work



While one of the most common initial responses to racial profiling is a denial that it occurs, there are some who do not deny its existence but rather argue that it does and should occur because it is a useful and appropriate tool to focus limited resources on those who are most likely to be engaged in inappropriate behaviour.



However, there is strong evidence that racial profiling does not work. In fact, where racial profiling has been studied in the context of law enforcement, such as in the United States, it has been found by some scholars to be neither an efficient nor effective approach to fighting crime. Studies in the United States have consistently found that while minorities (African American and Latino persons) were targeted more, the chance of finding contraband when their cars were searched was the same or less than White persons. In several studies, minorities were found to be statistically significantly less likely to have contraband found following a search. For example, a 2001 U.S. Department of Justice report on 1,272,282 citizen-police contacts in 1999 found that, although African Americans and Hispanics were much more likely than White persons to be stopped and searched, they were about half as likely to be in possession of contraband.



These studies have led experts in the United States to conclude that focusing only on one group will likely lead to persons who are committing crimes in other groups, often at the same rates, going unchallenged.



Similarly, when the U.S. Customs Service reformed their search procedures to eliminate racial, ethnic and gender bias in their search activity while instituting stronger supervisor oversight for searches, they were able to conduct 75% fewer searches without reducing the number of successful searches for contraband carrying passengers. And, the hit rates were essentially the same for 'Whites', 'Blacks' and 'Hispanics'. This means that by eliminating racial profiling, the Customs Service was more efficient and equally likely to catch passengers carrying contraband while reducing the number of innocent people who were subjected to the indignity of a search by three-quarters.



In addition to evidence concerning the ineffectiveness of racial profiling, it is also a practice that is logically flawed. Experts point out that even if certain crimes are mostly committed by members of a particular group, it does not mean that a particular person from that group is more likely to have committed a crime. And, even if more crime is committed by a certain group that make up a small percentage of the population, it is still more likely that any given crime will have been committed by someone belonging to the majority group.



In any event, statistics suggesting that a particular group commits a disproportionate amount of crime can often be skewed because of racial profiling itself. If a particular group is stopped more often, even if they are committing less crime than the rest of the population, the fact that they are scrutinized more frequently will result in higher charge rates. This then becomes the justification for profiling. Some scholars therefore argue that, at the end of the day, statistics do not tell the offending behaviour of different races, but rather they measure the actions of the entity engaging in profiling.



Therefore, there is significant evidence that racial profiling is neither an efficient nor an effective practice. And, the discussion that follows shows that racial profiling comes with a huge price tag to individuals, families and communities while negatively impacting the very institutions that practice it.



http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/paying-price-human-cost-racial-profiling/racial-profiling-doesnt-work">//http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/paying-price-human-cost-racial-profiling/racial-profiling-doesnt-work

How do they know racial profiling doesn't work? Why, because they discussed, looked into and studied it.



Hooray for knowledge!

[RW]

Care to answer my post Ro?

[Anonymous]

Whoa, what the? This isn't about demonizing kids or anyone.



You agree there's white privilege. Why not discuss it?



"I can't believe an old white guy is actually lecturing me about "white privilege. You've got some fucking nerve!!"



That's racist. I demand an apology.

It's like discussing how long is a piece of string. Even among minorities that believe it exists, there is no uniformity of opinion among us.



I don't give a fuck if ii is offered in as some Arts degree course. They are adults, it's up to them if they want to take the course or not. A classroom full of kiddies is the most captive of audiences.

[Anonymous]

Romero, think about it on the flip for just one second.  Say they had a workshop called "Racial Profiling: Black People Really Do Commit A Lot of Crimes".  Would you support that as a "different aspect" from which to discuss the problems within profiling?  I mean, they could be talking about the underlying socio-economic issues that could cause racial profiling.



Helpful or not helpful?

I doubt Romero wants to discuss the socioeconomic reasons that cause racial profiling. We've had similar discussions like this before and all he does is deny any culpability on the part of blacks and he tries to shuffle the black communities cultural problems under the rug.



Be my guest if you think you can get anything out of him other than the tired old "blame whitey" garbage that has been burned into his brain.

I'm not even really discussing that.  I am asking if he would support a similarly worded seminar if it related to a different racial issue and that racial issue didn't include whites in the title.

You raise a good point here RW. Romero thinks white privilege exists because all cops single out minorities for nasty treatment. However, East Asians are LESS likely than whites to be racially profiled. Men are WAY, WAY more likely to be stopped by the cops. Will the teacher's union be holding a workshop on "yellow female privilege" and policing. If they do, I will hop on the next plane to Toronto and kick their sick, trouble-making asses. ac_beating

[Romero]

Care to answer my post Ro?

Oh right, sure!

Romero, think about it on the flip for just one second.  Say they had a workshop called "Racial Profiling: Black People Really Do Commit A Lot of Crimes".  Would you support that as a "different aspect" from which to discuss the problems within profiling?  I mean, they could be talking about the underlying socio-economic issues that could cause racial profiling.



Helpful or not helpful?

How is that the flip side? They're just discussing white privilege, not accusing whites of committing any crimes.



Educators already often discuss racial and socioeconomic issues. I'm quite sure racial profiling has been talked about plenty.

[Romero]

You raise a good point here RW. Romero thinks white privilege exists because all cops single out minorities for nasty treatment.

I said those were the extreme examples. I've also mentioned minorities having to deal with racism, maybe less likely to get a job or apartment, being made to feel unwelcome at businesses...

[Anonymous]

You raise a good point here RW. Romero thinks white privilege exists because all cops single out minorities for nasty treatment.

I said those were the extreme examples. I've also mentioned minorities having to deal with racism, maybe less likely to get a job or apartment, being made to feel unwelcome at businesses...

Does "yellow female privilege" exist as stats tell us?

[RW]

Care to answer my post Ro?

Oh right, sure!

Romero, think about it on the flip for just one second.  Say they had a workshop called "Racial Profiling: Black People Really Do Commit A Lot of Crimes".  Would you support that as a "different aspect" from which to discuss the problems within profiling?  I mean, they could be talking about the underlying socio-economic issues that could cause racial profiling.



Helpful or not helpful?

How is that the flip side? They're just discussing white privilege, not accusing whites of committing any crimes.



Educators already often discuss racial and socioeconomic issues. I'm quite sure racial profiling has been talked about plenty.

Ro, you are missing the point.  Would you put up with it if a group was wording a "black" issue the same way?



I think the answer is no.

[RW]

You raise a good point here RW. Romero thinks white privilege exists because all cops single out minorities for nasty treatment.

I said those were the extreme examples. I've also mentioned minorities having to deal with racism, maybe less likely to get a job or apartment, being made to feel unwelcome at businesses...

So racism = white privilege?

[Anonymous]

Care to answer my post Ro?

Oh right, sure!

Romero, think about it on the flip for just one second.  Say they had a workshop called "Racial Profiling: Black People Really Do Commit A Lot of Crimes".  Would you support that as a "different aspect" from which to discuss the problems within profiling?  I mean, they could be talking about the underlying socio-economic issues that could cause racial profiling.



Helpful or not helpful?

How is that the flip side? They're just discussing white privilege, not accusing whites of committing any crimes.



Educators already often discuss racial and socioeconomic issues. I'm quite sure racial profiling has been talked about plenty.

Ro, you are missing the point.  Would you put up with it if a group was wording a "black" issue the same way?



I think the answer is no.

I asked him how I felt about "yellow female privilege", but we no the answer is no. With me, it would a trip to Toronto to kick some ass.



Anyway, I have no problem with this being discussed among adults. If you bring it up in an elementary school classroom, you should be charged with emotional abuse of kiddies.

So racism = white privilege?

Yep, conflating different things.