NAACP warns POC of traveling to Missouri

[AJH219 4,448]

2 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

What a compelling response

Well yours wasn't all that compelling to begin with, just typical fluff with little substance 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

1 minute ago, AJH219 said:

Well yours wasn't all that compelling to begin with, just typical fluff with little substance 

I just don't care to take statements seriously that show no sign of critical thought. Sorry  Have a nice day I guess. 

[DiamondAngel 5,044]

5 minutes ago, Bebe said:

I just don't see how this is fighting fire with fire at all.

The state government is passing laws that make discrimination against POC easier and stripping away legal protections for POC. They are failing to act on data showing that the police force in the state are actively targeting POC that has lead to increased traffic fines, senseless searches of vehicle and persons, and on occasion unnecessary violence. They are not acting on cases where POC have died in a jail cell despite not actually committing any crime. 

Wider issues in the state include violence against POC and terroristic threats made against POC in public schools and universities.


The NAACP is saying "Hey, be cautious when travelling to the state". I just don't see how it's close to an equivalent or extremist at all. They just laid out their specific issues with the state government and cautioned people travelling to the state about how the laws passed could effect them.

 

8 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Pointing out that some things are racist is an observation. How is that fighting fire with fire? Again, this isn't "People of Color, avoid Missouri because the white people there are racist"  If you believe that this simple act fuels racism somehow and lessens the credibility of the NAACP then yes, we'll have to agree to disagree, but we've both pointed out entirely legitimate reasons for this travel warning and you've said nothing against those points, so they will stand.

What a compelling response  

As a black person living in Missouri, I wouldn't recommend minorities come here either, so  

Well, as I said, clearly we have different ways of thinking, but I feel as if there's a major double standard here. Speaking out against the horrific law that is now in place in Missouri is encouraged. Telling POC to avoid it specifically? Laughable. And I read your points and you made fair ones - I never said they didn't "stand," so you need not get defensive. However, I strongly and passionately disagree with your logic and way of thinking and you can just accept it instead of trying to argue with me. 

At the end of the day, I think - and you may not agree, but it's what I think and I am a valid person and I'm allowed to have opinions - this announcement was unnecessary. I strongly believe that black lives DO matter and I'm glad the NAACP exists, but this announcement seems a tad.... eye rollish. 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

1 minute ago, GAGA1972 said:

 

Well, as I said, clearly we have different ways of thinking, but I feel as if there's a major double standard here. Speaking out against the horrific law that is now in place in Missouri is encouraged. Telling POC to avoid it specifically? Laughable. And I read your points and you made fair ones - I never said they didn't "stand," so you need not get defensive. However, I strongly and passionately disagree with your logic and way of thinking and you can just accept it instead of trying to argue with me. 

At the end of the day, I think - and you may not agree, but it's what I think and I am a valid person and I'm allowed to have opinions - this announcement was unnecessary. I strongly believe that black lives DO matter and I'm glad the NAACP exists, but this announcement seems a tad.... eye rollish. 

What is the double standard here

and what makes this seem eye rollish

 

[Bebe 17,289]

Just now, GAGA1972 said:

 

Well, as I said, clearly we have different ways of thinking, but I feel as if there's a major double standard here. Speaking out against the horrific law that is now in place in Missouri is encouraged. Telling POC to avoid it specifically? Laughable. And I read your points and you made fair ones - I never said they didn't "stand," so you need not get defensive. However, I strongly and passionately disagree with your logic and way of thinking and you can just accept it instead of trying to argue with me. 

At the end of the day, I think - and you may not agree, but it's what I think and I am a valid person and I'm allowed to have opinions - this announcement was unnecessary. I strongly believe that black lives DO matter and I'm glad the NAACP exists, but this announcement seems a tad.... eye rollish. 

Just to make it clear, the NAACP isn't telling POC to avoid the state. They are speaking out against the laws, informing people who are thinking of traveling to the state how those laws could affect them and giving them information and advice on what to do if they do face trouble within the state.

As the CNN article posted in OP reads further on:

"The advisory doesn't tell people to not go to Missouri. Rather, the NAACP wants minority travelers to be aware of what it says are potential risks.

"People should tell their relatives if they have to travel through the state, they need to be aware," Chapel said. "They should have bail money, you never know.""

[DiamondAngel 5,044]

Just now, ItsTommyBitch said:

What is the double standard here

and what makes this seem eye rollish

 

"Go visit black neighberhoods at your own risk - they tend to have high crime rates, more shootings, and more drugs."

"RACIST!!!!"

"Go visit Missouri at your own risk - they've passed laws that make POC more vulnerable." 

"Go NAACP! Missouri is disgusting."

You can argue that yes, the latter "headline" targets a specific group while the former just speaks on violence in general, but the point remains.

And what makes this eye rollish? I've explained it multiple times. Why can you not accept some people have different opinions? Mine will never change. Obviously yours won't either. 

[DiamondAngel 5,044]

1 minute ago, Bebe said:

Just to make it clear, the NAACP isn't telling POC to avoid the state. They are speaking out against the laws, informing people who are thinking of traveling to the state how those laws could affect them and giving them information and advice on what to do if they do face trouble within the state.

As the CNN article posted in OP reads further on:

"The advisory doesn't tell people to not go to Missouri. Rather, the NAACP wants minority travelers to be aware of what it says are potential risks.

"People should tell their relatives if they have to travel through the state, they need to be aware," Chapel said. "They should have bail money, you never know.""

I understand, but you can read my previous post in response to @ItsTommyBitch to get a better understanding of my opinion if you want it. 

[Bebe 17,289]

2 minutes ago, GAGA1972 said:

"Go visit black neighberhoods at your own risk - they tend to have high crime rates, more shootings, and more drugs."

"RACIST!!!!"

"Go visit Missouri at your own risk - they've passed laws that make POC more vulnerable." 

"Go NAACP! Missouri is disgusting."

You can argue that yes, the latter "headline" targets a specific group while the former just speaks on violence in general, but the point remains.

And what makes this eye rollish? I've explained it multiple times. Why can you not accept some people have different opinions? Mine will never change. Obviously yours won't either. 

 

Just now, GAGA1972 said:

I understand, but you can read my previous post in response to @ItsTommyBitch to get a better understanding of my opinion if you want it. 

Well I'd just say that the first quote would be a straight out racist generalisation and doesn't seem very helpful. If somebody was travelling to a neighbourhood that is known for gang violence and somebody said "This area is known for gang violence but if you practice common sense, don’t wander off by yourself at night and stay to lit walkways - you should be fine" then I don't see an issue with that. It's just pointing out a potential risk in the area and giving advice on how to be safe.

Likewise a warning from the NAACP that's like "The state has issues with racial discrimination within the police force and has recently passed laws that make it easier to discriminate against POC without fear of consequence or repercussion, so if you are traveling there alert friends and family and make sure they have bail money just in case anything happens" doesn't seem to be problematic in my eyes  It's just pointing out a potential risk in the area and giving advice on how to be safe.

These sort of cautions are not unheard of, even by governments. The U.K for example posted a caution on traveling to North Carolina and Mississippi if you are LGBT because of certain laws passed

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/21/foreign-office-warns-lgbt-tourists-of-north-carolina-and-mississippi-travel-anti-lgbt-laws

That feels similar to me - if a state or country has passed laws that are adverse to a minority group, it makes sense that some organisations or governments may issue cautions to people within that minority group about how those laws could hurt them.

But fine, if you still disagree then I don't think there is anything that can be said to convince either one of us.

[DiamondAngel 5,044]

11 minutes ago, Bebe said:

 

Well I'd just say that the first quote would be a straight out racist generalisation and doesn't seem very helpful. If somebody was travelling to a neighbourhood that is known for gang violence and somebody said "This area is known for gang violence but if you practice common sense, don’t wander off by yourself at night and stay to lit walkways - you should be fine" then I don't see an issue with that. It's just pointing out a potential risk in the area and giving advice on how to be safe.

Likewise a warning from the NAACP that's like "The state has issues with racial discrimination within the police force and has recently passed laws that make it easier to discriminate against POC without fear of consequence or repercussion, so if you are traveling there alert friends and family and make sure they have bail money just in case anything happens" doesn't seem to be problematic in my eyes  It's just pointing out a potential risk in the area and giving advice on how to be safe.

These sort of cautions are not unheard of, even by governments. The U.K for example posted a caution on traveling to North Carolina and Mississippi if you are LGBT because of certain laws passed

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/21/foreign-office-warns-lgbt-tourists-of-north-carolina-and-mississippi-travel-anti-lgbt-laws

That feels similar to me - if a state or country has passed laws that are adverse to a minority group, it makes sense that some organisations or governments may issue cautions to people within that minority group about how those laws could hurt them.

But fine, if you still disagree then I don't think there is anything that can be said to convince either one of us.

As an LGBT person I also find offense (maybe that's not the right word - I'm not offended but more disappointed) with the NC travel warning as well, to be fair. These warnings, despite your points, seem to stir up a lot in my eyes. I think they're unnecessary and nothing will change that. I do see your points, but I don't agree with them to an extent that makes these somewhat childish "announcements" necessary or even helpful in my eyes. 

Edit: I think it just comes down to my personality type. I try to always be kind and understanding and while NC and Missouri did wrong, there are more appropriate and mature ways to address them. Some people are more in-your-face and there's nothing wrong with that.

[CalixSpurius 540]

US is such a marvelous country tbh. 

Not necessarily positively but also either negatively. I cannot believe that US is a single country considering how socio-politically polarized it is. Think about this, San Francisco and NYC are parts of US but Missouri is also a part of US. 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

52 minutes ago, GAGA1972 said:

"Go visit black neighberhoods at your own risk - they tend to have high crime rates, more shootings, and more drugs."

"RACIST!!!!"

"Go visit Missouri at your own risk - they've passed laws that make POC more vulnerable." 

"Go NAACP! Missouri is disgusting."

You can argue that yes, the latter "headline" targets a specific group while the former just speaks on violence in general, but the point remains.

And what makes this eye rollish? I've explained it multiple times. Why can you not accept some people have different opinions? Mine will never change. Obviously yours won't either. 

I don't think its racist to avoid sketchy areas and towns, but its racist to generalize black neighborhoods as such. That seems unrelated. Interestingly enough, its that kind of racist generalization that fuels racism. People conflate blackness with crime even subconsciously and it leads to implicit bias. 

If you are in a sketchy neighborhood, you will take steps to protect yourself, and you probably got some kind of warning - whether explicit or implied. 

Meanwhile, this is talking about a concrete, tangible law that will potentially affect PoC. I don't think its the same. Also, I don't see the sort of "GO NAACP! Missouri is disgusting" outrage you're portraying really anywhere. Yet again, you're misportraying the NAACP's statements. Missouri isn't extra racist compared to the rest of the country, but they did pass laws that make PoC vulnerable, and thats worth noting for PoC planning on living or traveling through there. Just because people know certain places are racist doesn't mean they should expect 19th-20th century levels of government endorsed discrimination. In general, we expect our government to not be as racist as the people - even if it sometimes is. This is letting them know they cannot count on the government in certain situations to have their backs.

~~~

About opinions, I don't have a problem with different opinions, I have a problem with opinions that are uninformed or kind of ignorant in the face of easily available facts that speak to the contrary. We make lots of beliefs out of assumptions we deem to be rational or sacrosanct, but they often don't hold up under even the slightest scrutiny, and these beliefs/assumptions should not be the ones that actually end up governing people's lives, but they often do. We can and should do better. 

Also, my opinions on any given subject will generally change as I am presented with evidence to the contrary - That's how I've come to the positions I hold today, because I thought much differently in the past. 

If you want to discuss anything further, PM me or something. We're getting kinda off  

[Margaux 137]

I'm sorry reading this is rly funny bc half of you don't even know that Missouri is actually in the mid west not the south 

[Cuchulainn 3,040]

1 hour ago, GAGA1972 said:

Edit: I think it just comes down to my personality type. I try to always be kind and understanding and while NC and Missouri did wrong, there are more appropriate and mature ways to address them. Some people are more in-your-face and there's nothing wrong with that.

This speaks to me a lot  The 'in-your-face' approach to these topics is so off-putting for me. It comes across like they don't have the ability to see your point of view whatsoever. You disagree on the approach, so you are categorically wrong and your opinions don't matter. 

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

2 hours ago, HOTNebraskaGuy said:

This is stupid considering it’s probably the most safe now for a “POC” to go to the south than it ever was 200, 100, 50, or even 5 years ago. 

So you don't know?

[HOTNebraskaGuy 19,547]

Just now, ZacharyMark said:

So you don't know?

Obviously it’s a guess based on logic, I’ve never meet POC from the South 200, 100, or 50 years ago nor have I sat them down to ask them on their personal experiences.