Growing up in the suburbs of New York, in a town in which I was one of the very few (and by few I mean 10 or so) black girls, I surprisingly rarely felt my color.  I had lived in this neighborhood since the age of 5, and grown up my entire life mainly around people who did not look like me.  All of my friends were white, but race was never something we spoke of – not because we couldn’t, but because it didn’t matter.  Around me, kids would make jokes about black people or say stereotypical things about them, but assumed I would not take offense to it because I was not like “those” black people.  After a racial remark was made about a black person in front of me, I have usually been told that I am not like other black people, which I assume is that person’s way of making the remark OK.  As ridiculous as it may seem however, I started to believe that.  As a child and young adult, race can be a confusing concept.  Growing up being told by my peers that I am not like the other people who look like me, and having a father who many people assume is white because of his light skin (although he considers himself black), it was confusing for me to find my racial identity.  I knew I was black, but I could not relate to stereotypically black things, nor did I ever feel prejudiced against.   The most judgment I ever felt was from other black people, calling me an “oreo” or asking me why I acted so “white”.  Because of the lack of racism I faced growing up, and the amount of acceptance I’ve felt from people of all races since I was a young child, I believe that in a way it has made me naive to what is happening in the world around me.

It may seem like a very simple way of thinking, but because I did not feel any racism, I guess I assumed it wasn’t happening to anyone else.  Learning about what blacks had to go through before and after the Civil War seemed like it was centuries ago, and I thought those struggles were over for black Americans.  So, when I came across this article from CNN.com http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/30/justice/mississippi–hate-crime/index.html?hpt=ju_c2#,  I was both startled and disgusted.  I could not believe that something so hateful, and based solely on race could still happen in this day.

 

 

Advertisements

3 responses

  1. Unamused says:

    The media loves to obsess over white racism, which is a statistically insignificant problem, but hate crime today is overwhelmingly a black-on-white problem.

    Unfortunately, hate crime reporting is laughably biased, so it’s impossible to get accurate statistics from that. For example, according to the FBI, “Hispanic” is a victim category, but not a perpetrator category. So when a Mexican attacks a white person for racial reasons, they dutifully report it as a “white-on-white” racial hate crime.

    What we do know is that inter-racial violent crime is overwhelmingly committed by blacks against whites, and blacks are over-represented even in the official hate crime statistics – they are twice as likely as whites to commit them.

  2. it is interesting that you mock statistics, yet state that white racism is “statistically insignificant”. According to the FBI –

    “Of the 6,225 known offenders, 62.4 percent were white, 18.5 percent were black, and 7.3 percent were groups of individuals of various races. The race was unknown for 10.2 percent of offenders, and other races accounted for the remaining offenders.”

    The reason Mexican-on-White crime can be considered “white-on-white” is because Hispanic is not acknowledged as a racial category by the US (see census 2010), instead it is view as an ethnicity which means that yes a Mexican can identify as a White Hispanic.

    And as for the rest of your data, please provide statistical evidence whenever commenting on our class blog. Whether your idea is different, opposing or offensive, at least let it be accurate.

  3. Unamused says:

    I mock the government’s laughably biased hate crime reporting. You don’t seem to understand the problem: “Hispanic” is a victim category, but not a perpetrator category. So every racially motivated Hispanic criminal is recorded as “white,” which they’re generally not; but Hispanic victims are “Hispanic.” It’s just one example of how hate crime reporting is biased, and tries to exaggerate white hate crimes and minimize anti-white hate crimes.

    Here are some others: the New Century Foundation’s study of race and crime in the USA, “The Color of Crime,” notes that

    (1) local officials get to decide which crimes are hate crimes,

    (2) only 0.3 percent of inter-racial crimes reported to the police are considered to be motivated, even “in part,” by racial bias,

    (3) in 2002, only 2,168 of the 5,738 so-called hate crimes were violent — insignificant next to the average 1.68 million violent inter-racial crimes committed annually from 2001 to 2003, the vast majority committed by blacks against whites (see below), and

    (4) of the six hate crime murders committed in 2002 (three “white”-on-black, one “white”-on-Hispanic, one Indian-on-”white” and one black-on-Hispanic), only three appear to have actually been racially motivated: one white-on-black, one black-on-Hispanic and one Hispanic-on-black, the latter reported as “white”-on-black.

    According to the FBI’s hate crime statistics, in 2009, about 1,318,398 violent crimes were committed nationwide. Of these, about 1,759 were anti-black hate crimes. That’s 0.1%—totally insignificant. By the same statistics, and given that 13% of the population is black, blacks are twice as likely as whites to commit officially designated hate crimes.

    The inter-racial violent crime rates are more interesting, because they’re not politically biased—you can make a “hate crime” disappear by refusing to see the race angle, but not the crime itself. This data is from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which asks a representative sample of as many as 134,000 Americans what crimes they were victims of, and who the perpetrator was. It counts nearly all Hispanics as “white,” so the victims and perpetrators are overwhelmingly black and “white.”

    In 2008, blacks committed 83% of the 520,000 violent inter-racial single-offender crimes involving blacks and whites (“whites”). The victims of black violent crime are mostly white: black criminals chose white victims 54% of the time. White criminals chose black victims 5% of the time. This is not due to whites being “richer”: only 21% of black-on-white crimes were robberies; the rest were assaults and rapes, presumably without economic motive.

    Blacks were thus 32 times as likely to attack whites, as whites were to attack blacks. For robbery (mugging), they were 67 times as likely.

    There were over 19,000 black-on-white rapes: 53 per day. There were zero reported cases of white-on-black rape.

    For multiple-offender (gang or group) crime, blacks committed 100% of the recorded inter-racial violent crimes: 142,000 in all, including 89,000 assaults and 49,000 robberies. That leaves 10 black-on-white gang rapes per day. I wonder how many of these get reported as official “hate crimes.” I wonder if they might have a racial component, considering that (statistically speaking) white-on-black rape simply doesn’t happen in America. Again, there were no reported cases of white-on-black gang crimes.

    If you like, I can also explain how poverty, unemployment, lack of educational opportunities, and “police racism” utterly fail to account for any of this.