OT Derby Friar Gate Incident

[Andy_Faber]

You’re right, we do all do it and I’ve certainly judged people I don’t know, but usually on the basis of their behaviour.
However it is racism and it is bigotry when such a judgement/assumption is based on ethnicity and skin colour alone.
There seem to be obvious similarities with the Liverpool Victory Parade and yet, in your own words, ‘terror was not considered’.
Why? Because the perpetrator was white? What a sad reflection on both society and, apparently, your own prejudice.

Where did I say I thought that? You've profiled me rA, tut tut

But you are absolutely wrong about racism/bigotry. Any judgement can be based on one factor alone, of which ethnicity and skin colour are just two on a very long list, or a number of factors. Someone wearing all black, hood up, mask on, powerful e-bike versus someone else wearing a floral dress on a bike with a wicker basket up front, who's most likely to pinch your phone? See, you've indulged in profiling, and no skin colour or ethnicity in sight

The discounting of terror in the victory parade incident was by the police, not me by the way

[Andy_Faber]

Is it prejudice if the statistics support the likelihood of something. Just asking for a friend.

I'm this case I don't think the Indian community is particularly prone to terrorism and so could reasonably feel unhappy to be lumped in via profiling with a group more prone to terror attacks.

Who was it that did just that by using the wide description 'Asian'? I thought that odd

[ramAnag]

Where did I say I thought that? You've profiled me rA, tut tut

But you are absolutely wrong about racism/bigotry. Any judgement can be based on one factor alone, of which ethnicity and skin colour are just two on a very long list, or a number of factors. Someone wearing all black, hood up, mask on, powerful e-bike versus someone else wearing a floral dress on a bike with a wicker basket up front, who's most likely to pinch your phone? See, you've indulged in profiling, and no skin colour or ethnicity in sight

The discounting of terror in the victory parade incident was by the police, not me by the way

That’s exactly my point, AF, the differences are behavioural…and it was you who said ‘most intentional harm aimed at a random public and perpetrated by Asians in the UK are eventually deemed ‘terror’’. I assumed that’s what you meant.

I also appreciate that it was the police who ‘discounted terror in the victory parade incident’. Hence my comment about societal values.

[Andy_Faber]

That?s exactly my point, AF, the differences are behavioural.

But you?ve been suckered in there rA, I never mentioned behaviour so your judgement was made based on my description. Again, tut tut

[ramAnag]

But you?ve been suckered in there rA, I never mentioned behaviour so your judgement was made based on my description. Again, tut tut

Of course you did. Look at your description of the attitude/behaviour of the two bike riders when you asked which did I think was more likely to steal my phone. We all do it all the time, I agree, but it is surely wrong to base such conclusions on ethnicity and racial appearance and that seems to be what happened here. Terrorism was suspected because the alleged perpetrator was Asian and it was you who began by saying, ‘there’s a reason for that’.

Anyway, off to Manchester Airport so can’t continue for a while.

[Andy_Faber]

Of course you did. Look at your description of the attitude/behaviour of the two bike riders when you asked which did I think was more likely to steal my phone. We all do it all the time, I agree, but it is surely wrong to base such conclusions on ethnicity and racial appearance and that seems to be what happened here. Terrorism was suspected because the alleged perpetrator was Asian and it was you who began by saying, ‘there’s a reason for that’.

Anyway, off to Manchester Airport so can’t continue for a while.

I’ll reiterate. I said nothing about the attitude or behaviour of either bike rider. You made an assumption (profiled) based on appearance. Its fine to admit it, as I said, and as you agreed, we all do it.

NB the latter bike rider was generic but the first bike rider was the delivery guy from our local takeaway, lovely fellah who’s more likely to hand in a phone than steal it. I’ll tell him you have his card marked

[Ram Pant]

I get the feeling, rightly or wrongly, that Monday's planned pre Stoke game march follows the duck theory used by others in this thread. This despite the police having said that it isn't a terrorist attack.

[SithHappens]

Ugh

[ramAnag]

I??ll reiterate. I said nothing about the attitude or behaviour of either bike rider. You made an assumption (profiled) based on appearance. Its fine to admit it, as I said, and as you agreed, we all do it.

NB the latter bike rider was generic but the first bike rider was the delivery guy from our local takeaway, lovely fellah who??s more likely to hand in a phone than steal it. I??ll tell him you have his card marked

You’re being ridiculous. I accepted, several posts ago, that we all make assumptions - sometimes rightly sometimes wrongly - based on appearance and behaviour. You cited the hypothetical example of two bike riders - one in a black hoody wearing a mask on a powerful bike, the other in a floral dress with a basket - and asked who was more likely to steal a phone. The answer is obvious but based on assumption.

My point is that we cannot, or should not, allow such stereotyping/assumption to extend to race/ethnicity/skin colour. It’s dangerous and divisive but then I guess that’s what some are aiming for.

[Geoff Parkstone]

So if I understand you correctly rA, you're happy for profilng to be based on everything other than race/ethnicity/skin colour?

Or are you simply unhappy with profiling generally?