First armed robbery in Birmingham in 30 years

[Zimm]

I see.

I understand your frustration with your new neighbors. NOBODY would want to live near the behavior you describe.

I don't have any links to back up my statements, but I am 100% certain there are many reasons for their bad behavior, or even just one, lazy. However, I am also 100% certain, that no where on the list of reasons for bad behavior, is there the reason, "skin color".

From your other words, it seems you haven't always bought into stereotypes, but now is not the time to do it either.

Don't let your bad experience suck you down into the stereotype hole of bullshit.

I could tell you about my experience with my lily white [[long time) neighbor and my new black/formerely Detroit neighbor, but I won't bore you with it, I'm hoping you get my drift.

i think you have a pretty good take on the message that i am trying to convey.

i've got experiences of my own that i suspect mirror what you're alluding to.

[jt1]

your words, not mine. i never made that assertion.

It seemed implied in your post.

yes, it does. now, if i were to say that they were universally true, that would be a major stretch. but to say that they are not based in fact would be to say that the 2 examples i cited were something other than the stereotype implies, unless you are suggesting that i am lying about those 2 households i am citing.

You are claiming that stereotypes are based in fact with a sample size of two homes? It appears that you are looking for a reason to support your beliefs. It is unfortunate that you are willing to claim it as fact based upon such a small sample set. I certainly hope that there isn't a decent 'Detroit' family on your block. That would just shatter your easy to assign stereotypes.

i would accept that statement, trusting that you accurately assessed the assholeness of those boomers

That's truly unfortunate.

It appears to me that you have some beliefs you are looking to justify. And those two 'Section 8 homes' full of 'Detroiters' allows you to do so.

[Detroit Stylin]

your words, not mine. i never made that assertion.


yes, it does. now, if i were to say that they were universally true, that would be a major stretch. but to say that they are not based in fact would be to say that the 2 examples i cited were something other than the stereotype implies, unless you are suggesting that i am lying about those 2 households i am citing.


i would accept that statement, trusting that you accurately assessed the assholeness of those boomers.

Not only does he NOT think for himself he also tap dances too! Just look at the way he addressed not one damn thing!

[Zimm]

Not only does he NOT think for himself he also tap dances too! Just look at the way he addressed not one damn thing!

i can't dance as i am prevented by doing so by my whiteness. wait, you don't buy into that sort of thing, so how else can i explain it to you?

[Zimm]

You are claiming that stereotypes are based in fact with a sample size of two homes? It appears that you are looking for a reason to support your beliefs. It is unfortunate that you are willing to claim it as fact based upon such a small sample set. I certainly hope that there isn't a decent 'Detroit' family on your block. That would just shatter your easy to assign stereotypes.

i think it would be more accurate to say that the stereotype already exists and that you are disappointed that i am willing to buy into it with so few cited examples.

i will admit that the number of cases that i have experienced is small, yet i find it enough to be willing to accept some broad brush mindsets held about such people as they fit perfectly with the examples i see from my own home. please keep in mind that i am very willing to change my course of thinking when i see equally powerful or numerous examples that would disprove such thinking.

but honestly, for now it only seems prudent to say that because a population is living up to the horrible things people say about that population, i am more willing that ever to buy into that line of thinking until i find examples of people who do not meet those presuppositions.

expecting people to meet excessive expectations when overwhelming actual and anecdotal evidence points to the contrary would simply be foolish. when evidence points to those expectations to be incorrect, failing to re-evaluate that position would be equally foolish.

[Thames]

i think you have a pretty good take on the message that i am trying to convey.

i've got experiences of my own that i suspect mirror what you're alluding to.

Hmmm, I don't know, unless you realize that my old neighbor was a fucking slob and my new neighbor was wonderful. Then, yeah we're on the same page.

I hate stereotypes and I refuse to buy into them. It leads to no where and clouds reasonable thinking.

[Zimm]

Hmmm, I don't know, unless you realize that my old neighbor was a fucking slob and my new neighbor was wonderful. Then, yeah we're on the same page.

I hate stereotypes and I refuse to buy into them. It leads to no where and clouds reasonable thinking.

yep, we're on the same page.

imo, accurate stereotypes can be useful tools and save people a lot of wasted time and energy, and help avoid unpleasant interactions. inaccurate stereotypes or those in the hands of fools can be destructive, wasteful, or cause you to miss opportunities.

[DetroitDad]

Criminals are sometimes misguided capitalists, and capitalists go where the oppurtunity is.

Countless times on here, suburbanites have bragged about how they can leave their front doors unlocked, and regularly run into the mall while leaving the car running and/or unlocked....

[mwilbert]

I always find it surprising how steep the gradient in criminal activity can be. Some of it is undoubtedly policing, but it seems like most criminals don't go where the money is, unlike Willie Sutton, but stick to places they know. Law enforcement could take advantage of that, but to the extent that those places are underfunded, they can't.

[DetroitDad]

I always find it surprising how steep the gradient in criminal activity can be. Some of it is undoubtedly policing, but it seems like most criminals don't go where the money is, unlike Willie Sutton, but stick to places they know. Law enforcement could take advantage of that, but to the extent that those places are underfunded, they can't.

Interesting point, I made a wrong connection between crimes of opportunity, and organized crime.

One might think that if you're above the poverty line, no matter how vigilant your area, career criminals are always a risk. I'm sure having a good police force helps, but I wouldn't rely on them for being anything other than just one line of defense.

[fryar]

Random jumble of thoughts: 30 years?!?!?!?! Well, they certainly were due... I can't believe they took the guy's wedding ring. That's just cold. No honor among these thieves. LOL at the many references to other threads on here, were they "from Detroit" and all that. Zimm, look. If I observe the fact that the hoarders selling their old junk to those two guys on American Pickers are almost exclusively older, rural white dudes, it would be a logical fallacy to then extrapolate that all older, rural white dudes hoard old junk. I will say that if you come across someone hoarding a bunch of old junk in their barn, it's unlikely to be the young waiter who shares their studio on the lower east side of Manhattan with a roommate - chances, it seems to me, are that it'll be an older, rural white dude. But that doesn't mean all older, rural white dudes hoard in their barn. And if I don't get to control the conversation, why does DetroitDad? :-p As for the gradient of crime, I agree 100%. It's terribly unfair, but I completely subscribe to that idea. I leave my car unlocked in Greenwich, CT where I lock and club it at, say, the airport parking at JFK. What, some guy's gonna bust up there from the Bronx, say, and case the neighborhood, in order to score with my old Saturn? I mean, it's pre-Millenium! I don't assume all Bronxites leave their wheelchairs lying in the bushes, but yeah, it would have to be somebody from elsewhere. If you live in a fancy suburb, you have too much to lose from pulling some shit like car theft [[unless you're a teenager, maybe). Nobody's ever stealing my car, not out there.

[English]

yep, we're on the same page.

imo, accurate stereotypes can be useful tools and save people a lot of wasted time and energy, and help avoid unpleasant interactions. inaccurate stereotypes or those in the hands of fools can be destructive, wasteful, or cause you to miss opportunities.

Funny how people tend to believe that the stereotypes about others are true, but of course, the ones about THEIR group are patently false.

If your stereotypes about Detroiters save you lots of wasted time and energy, I think I'll believe all the many stereotypes about metro Detroit suburbanites that are bandied about not only in the city, but in other locales.

Either we live our lives based on stereotypes, or we take people as individuals. Cherry-picking isn't fair.

[Kevgoblue]

Do you mind if I ask which wonderful, crime free and well maintained non-Detroit community suddenly has signs up seeking Section 8 occupants? If the community is such an exquisite place to live I would think they would have plenty of people willing to pay the market rate for the area. The usual scenerio when Section 8 renters move into a perceived "nice" area is when the development was partially funded by public dollars.

[bailey]

Funny how people tend to believe that the stereotypes about others are true, but of course, the ones about THEIR group are patently false.

If your stereotypes about Detroiters save you lots of wasted time and energy, I think I'll believe all the many stereotypes about metro Detroit suburbanites that are bandied about not only in the city, but in other locales.

Either we live our lives based on stereotypes, or we take people as individuals. Cherry-picking isn't fair.

Wait... isn't "taking people as individuals" the very definition of "cherry picking" in this context? After all, one doesn't need to "cherry pick" to find an example of a stereotype, examples abound. That is how the stereotype became a stereotype, right? One needs to cherry pick to find an example of one NOT being a stereotype.

[iheartthed]

Wait... isn't "taking people as individuals" the very definition of "cherry picking" in this context? After all, one doesn't need to "cherry pick" to find an example of a stereotype, examples abound. That is how the stereotype became a stereotype, right? One needs to cherry pick to find an example of one NOT being a stereotype.

Not really.

Say I were to declare "Asians speak Japanese". Yes, some Asians do speak Japanese, but not all Asians speak Japanese. In fact, most Asian people probably don't speak Japanese since the population of Japan is just a small subset of the population of the Asian continent. So I kinda sound like a dumbass for trying to ascribe the ability to speak Japanese to all people who identify as Asian.

[bailey]

Not really.

Say I were to declare "Asians speak Japanese". Yes, some Asians do speak Japanese, but not all Asians speak Japanese. In fact, most Asian people probably don't speak Japanese since the population of Japan is just a small subset of the population of the Asian continent. So I kinda sound like a dumbass for trying to ascribe the ability to speak Japanese to all people who identify as Asian.

No you kinda sound like a dumbass because Japan is an island nation and not part of the continent...but I digress. Your declaration is zoomed too far out. The comment and the stereotype was not about "all" people from anywhere. It was about section 8 renters from Detroit living up to [[or down to) the stereotypes about them. Its a silly debate, because I'm not defending the comment here...just saying that cherry picking comment didn't make sense. One "cherry picks" the exception. It is the act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.

[iheartthed]

No you kinda sound like a dumbass because Japan is an island nation and not part of the continent...but I digress.

Oh my, how the education system has failed you... You do realize that islands are part of continents, don't you? Greenland is part of North America, the British Isles are part of Europe and Japan is part of Asia.

I guess I don't really even need to respond to the rest since you're clearly coming unarmed into this battle of wits.

[English]

Wait... isn't "taking people as individuals" the very definition of "cherry picking" in this context? After all, one doesn't need to "cherry pick" to find an example of a stereotype, examples abound. That is how the stereotype became a stereotype, right?

But there are more examples of ex-Detroiters who are good and productive neighbors than the cases described earlier in the thread. Funny how those of us who cut our grass, pay our bills on time, get up and go to work every day, and mind our own business aren't the stereotype... although there are far more ex-Detroiters who fall into THAT category than "troublemakers."

One needs to cherry pick to find an example of one NOT being a stereotype.

Obviously, you know all the wrong kinds of people from Detroit, then.

[bailey]

Oh my, how the education system has failed you... You do realize that islands are part of continents, don't you? Greenland is part of North America, the British Isles are part of Europe and Japan is part of Asia.

I guess I don't really even need to respond to the rest since you're clearly coming unarmed into this battle of wits.

alright, i admit, in my effort to be pithy i was a little sloppy. my comment was your usage of "on the continent". as in, no one would say that Great Britian is part of continental Europe....geologically ok, but go ahead and tell a brit they are on "the continent". might get a pop in the nose. Actually we could have a very fascinating discussion on continents as there is no universally accepted definition of the word "continent"; the Oxford English Dictionary defines one as "One of the main continuous bodies of land on the earth's surface." . By that definition, the continent of Australia [[which is an island btw) includes only the Austrailian mainland and not the nearby islands, like New Guinea. Then of course there is the rather arbitrary separation of the European continent from the Asian. Same goes for North and South America. Geologically they are one land mass, but defined as two separate continents. In fact, depending on where one is raised in the world, one could learn there are a few as four continents. Webster's even defines a continent as " one of the six or seven great divisions of land on the globe." See isn't cherry picking fun?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey
Wait... isn't "taking people as individuals" the very definition of "cherry picking" in this context? After all, one doesn't need to "cherry pick" to find an example of a stereotype, examples abound. That is how the stereotype became a stereotype, right?

But there are more examples of ex-Detroiters who are good and productive neighbors than the cases described earlier in the thread. Funny how those of us who cut our grass, pay our bills on time, get up and go to work every day, and mind our own business aren't the stereotype... although there are far more ex-Detroiters who fall into THAT category than "troublemakers."

well, as you said. life isn't fair. however...I believe the statement was about observations of section 8 renters from Detroit behaving according to a stereotype, not a blanket statement about all "ex detroiters".

[Bearinabox]

well, as you said. life isn't fair.

The point is that life is a hell of a lot less fair for some people than for others, and when you endorse and propagate stereotypes, you're helping to keep it that way.

[bailey]

The point is that life is a hell of a lot less fair for some people than for others, and when you endorse and propagate stereotypes, you're helping to keep it that way.

I'm neither endorsing nor propagating. merely observing.

[Bearinabox]

I'm neither endorsing nor propagating. merely observing.

I didn't say you were. Maybe I should have phrased it as "when one endorses..."

[iheartthed]

alright, i admit, in my effort to be pithy i was a little sloppy. my comment was your usage of "on the continent". as in, no one would say that Great Britian is part of continental Europe....geologically ok, but go ahead and tell a brit they are on "the continent".

At the risk of digressing......

Now you're arguing semantics. British people use "the continent" as a moniker for the mainland. It's irrelevant whether they "believe" that Britain is part of Europe or not. It is. End of story.

For the record, I said:

In fact, most Asian people probably don't speak Japanese since the population of Japan is just a small subset of the population of the Asian continent.

Nowhere did I imply that Japan was on the mainland of the Asian continent. I'm quite well aware that it is entirely on an archipelago.

[bailey]

At the risk of digressing......

Now you're arguing semantics. British people use "the continent" as a moniker for the mainland. It's irrelevant whether they "believe" that Britain is part of Europe or not. It is. End of story.

For the record, I said:



Nowhere did I imply that Japan was on the mainland of the Asian continent. I'm quite well aware that it is entirely on an archipelago.

...and I admitted I was sloppy in an effort to be pithy.. score one for you. you win the internet for yesterday. huzzah!

[iheartthed]

...and I admitted I was sloppy in an effort to be pithy.. score one for you. you win the internet for yesterday. huzzah!

I win the internet everyday.