zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. teddyh+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-06-27 06:15:39
The causes in this case are myriad and complex. I should have said “By only pointing to the external cause…”. By ignoring the non-external causal factors, you appear to be trying to shift blame from failure of police themselves to some external factor. Which is victim-blaming.

And, yes, nobody cares about any cause of a problem unless it helps coming up with a solution. If a system is complex enough, it is not logical to insist on analyzing it exhaustively to find all the root causes; it is more expedient to fix the problem some other way. And this is not even what you were doing; you pointed out one external factor and highlighted it, implying that the blame and the problem must be fixed there.

replies(1): >>banads+bc5
2. banads+bc5[view] [source] 2020-06-29 17:30:42
>>teddyh+(OP)
Nope, analyzing various social dynamics between two interrelated parties is not "victim blaming", its basic social science. Anyone trying to use a univariate analysis to explain human social relationships is an anti-scientific ideologue, or just an idiot.
replies(1): >>teddyh+Rzl
◧◩
3. teddyh+Rzl[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-07-05 22:53:58
>>banads+bc5
The original post, which is what we are discussing, did not do any “analyzing [of] various social dynamics”. On the contrary, it pointed the finger squarely at one external factor – the behavior of victims of police – and left it at that. If that’s not victim-blaming, I don’t know what is.

> anti-scientific ideologue, or just an idiot

Since you have now proceeded to name-calling, I think I will refrain from engaging further.

[go to top]