We have previously discussed how many professors seem to compete in finding new forms of racism in every facet of society and education. Astrophysics, math, runoffs, science, statistics, and meritocracy have all been denounced as racist. In this academic cottage industry, professors secure publications and speaking opportunities by identifying racism in expressions, images, or entire fields. Even time itself has been declared racist. Now, however, academics have found another undiscovered continent of white privilege: niceness.
When I saw a story in The College Fix on a study of “niceness as Whiteness,” I was skeptical and decided to take a look. The study by Vanderbilt Postdoctoral Research Fellow Abigail Beneke, Professors Benjamin Fisher (U. Wisconsin-Madison), F. Chris Curran (U. Florida), and Samantha Viano (George Mason) was first flagged by Dr. James Nuzzo.
The paper “Niceness as Whiteness in School Police Officers’ Perceptions of Student Arrest” addresses the “perceptions of arrest” by school resource officers, or SROs) in two school districts.
The officers appear to be precisely what you are looking for in an SRO: empathetic and reluctant to make arrests. The researchers admit that they try to avoid arrests. However, according to the authors, hidden behind those sympathetic approaches was, of course, a boiling caldron of racism in terms of the racial disparity of those arrested.
Indeed, the researchers realized that it was the niceness itself that was the evidence of oppressive “Whiteness.” Indeed, the officers may not want to be engines of racism and use “niceness” as a “coping mechanism,” but do so by deluding themselves and others that they are nice:
“Nice SROs did not want to arrest children. Nice police officers thought of themselves as well-meaning. Yet, they expressed being required to arrest children because of real or imagined mandates. They used niceness as a strategy for upholding a system of Whiteness that systematically privileges White people and excludes those who fall outside of Whiteness. Niceness hinders possibilities for the types of political, communal relationships central to authentic care.”
The paper makes it sound like everyone would be better off, or at least more honest, to return to hostile, racist-spewing officers. The reason is that niceness is an “enduring component of Whiteness” which “allows predominantly White people to elide how their own actions contribute to inequality by maintaining a sense of their own benevolence.”
The evidence of niceness includes such findings as how officers work at “minimiz[ing] the negative impact of arrest by highlighting their own goodness.” (This includes saying things like “You want to listen to the radio? You want the window down? Is there a station you want to listen to?” after an arrest.)
Then there is the fact that these officers have good relationships and perspectives of the students. Again, it is just a shield of “whiteness”:
“SROs used niceness as Whiteness in their recounts of arrest … by highlighting the positive relationships they had with students they arrested…As with highlighting their own goodness, highlighting these positive relationships reframes violence (i.e., arrest) that contributes to racial inequality as a positive, since students still like the SROs. This strategy emphasizes the officer’s ability to retain his niceness—by virtue of the maintained interpersonal relationship—despite having arrested the student.”
The paper is an example of ideological screeds posing as academic research. Based on a few interviews, the researchers simply declare the empathy and relationships to be shields perpetuating “whiteness.” They cite other studies identifying niceness as a whiteness tactic:
“Prior research has demonstrated how primarily White women educators use niceness to uphold Whiteness in their work with children (Bissonnette 2016; Drake & Rodriguez 2022; Gardiner et al., 2023; Vlach et al., 2022; Wiborg, 2022). We found niceness was also present in the work of SROs, suggesting the potential for broader application of niceness to well-intentioned actors working in structurally violent systems. In addition to framing niceness as a means of excusing behavior that upholds Whiteness, we equally center the structural binds that delimit SROs’ capacity for providing care. In doing so, we identify niceness as a coping mechanism for arresting children.”
At these universities (Vanderbilt, Wisconsin, George Mason, and the University of Florida), these faculty members and their obvious agenda are viewed as ideal choices to teach their students.
With four kids, I found the SROs at their schools to be extraordinary and popular figures. They would routinely intervene with kids to see if they were having trouble or try to direct them away from trouble. It turns out that everything that parents valued in their SROs was a perpetuation of privilege, according to these researchers.
While the researchers insist that “we do not intend to demonize individual SROs,” they reward the cooperating officers by twisting their every comment as revealing their deep white privilege. Presumably, they conveyed to the SROs that this would be a fair, unbiased study. It was neither, and, perhaps reaffirming their own triumph over racism, they were not a bit nice about it.
Has this study be replicated or reproduced anywhere?
I’m sure we all look forward to following the science.
Off-Topic: News stories are coming out today about Trump evading Iranian assassination risk in Turkey using a catering truck. In light of the increased risk, its obvious that the President needs a body double – I nominate Alec Baldwin since he seems to be the person with the most experience, and has won widespread acclaim pretending to be Trump. 🙂
Of course, a professor would equate “nice” and “being white.” The democRAT has been playing the long game for over 2 generations, beginning with the universities, and them moving to the high schools. The democRAT has now infested the elementary schools with their anti-American, communist indoctrination. It is now manifesting itself in “technicolor,” as the democRAT is no longer attempting to hide its true anti-American, communist intentions. See recent elections.
If these people were being paid to make the neo-Nazi National Alliance look reasonable, what would they do differently?
Ok, I’ll bite. What’s the term when a non-white is kind to another non-white and where’s the study supporting the term?
The first slaves brought to the new world were IRISH. Every chance they get, these blacks should be thanking the ten of thousands of white Union Soldiers that died during the US Black War. Where are my reparations for losing a dozen ancestors to this free black foolishness? We should of sent them all back in 1865!!
Absolute bollocks. 1) Irish were never slaves. 2) The first slaves in the New World were employed by the Spanish empire from a very early date; it is what gave rise to the whole concept of a trans-Atlantic slave trade. You are just a nasty little racist.
A reference to indentured servitude, a 7-year temporary slavery system used by early Americans. The slaves were often teenage Euro orphans, unwanted illegitimate kids, or kids whose sole parent was incarcerated.
These kids proved unsuitable for field labor in the southern colonies because they had no immunity to malaria.
They would die within a few years and never achieve emancipation. They died as slave labor in the New World.
Doesn’t that fit the definition of “slave”?
No. Slaves were legally distinct from indentured servants. And none of these indentured servants predate the presence of West African slaves in the Americas. Try learning real history rather than your imagined version.
Oh, and by the way, given the African slaves arrived in the Americas a very long time before the peak of Irish immigration, chances are that the American heritage of a lot of blacks is a lot older than you tiresome plastic Paddies who somehow think you are still Irish 150 years after your bog-trotting forebears abandoned the Emerald Isle… If I did a Biden and claimed that my ethnicity or identity was driven by that of my ancestors in 1850, then that would make me Welsh and Jewish. But I am neither. Toodles, you racist idiot.
Let me guess, everyone is a racist but you?
No, but people who express racial bigotry and hatred like our friend above clearly are racists. Really not a difficult concept, and really not difficult to spot. I mean, this idiot claims to have lost a dozen ancestors during the Civil War fighting as Union troops. Really? Really? A dozen? Moronic hyperbole.
Right the wrong… SEND THEM ALL BACK TO WHERE THEIR ANCESTORS CAME.
Ireland does not want American racists who think they are Irish back! That is what you meant?
Dear USA, the very fact that you feel the need to have police officers in your schools shows just how broken your society is…
Couldn’t agree more.
The fact that the USA sees the need for armed police officers in schools is a sad and pitiful state of affairs that perfectly encapsulates the miserable state of society in your country.
I recall an incident a few years ago when a senior police officer from New Zealand came to the USA for 3 months as part of an exchange program with the Los Angeles police. He stayed for less than a week, then packed up and came home in disgust. When asked what he had learned, and why he did not stay for the full 3 months, he said that the Los Angeles police simply viewed the entire population as potential suspects and criminals rather than citizens that they were supposed to protect.
He said that this is a total perversion of the concept of community policing that he was trained to perform.
The US isn’t a nanny-state. Each person is expected to follow laws all of the time. The police should be hanging out at donut shops.
This ‘Niceness’ is ‘Whiteness’ is just another repackaging of blackness-industry types to evade responsibility for crime and both personal and social immaturity that exist in elements of the black community (for a variety of causes such as insufficient parental – especially paternal – guidance and discipline, the lack of desire or will to embrace any sort of organized and disciplined life (or even self) and the valorization of rule-breaking).
To support this conceptual scamming, the vital and necessary discipline of social respect for others and a basic civic politeness are recast as MERE ‘niceness’, as if such vital habits were merely unnecessary or even dangerously self-suppressing characteristics and habits imposed simply in the service of imposing subordination on blacks by whites and thus – but of course and tah-dahhhh! – racist.
So too the virtue of ‘benevolence’, grounded in the presumption that each of one’s fellow (and sister) students are to be treated with dignity and well-wishing respect until the behavior of one or some demonstrates otherwise.
Once again, I would say, what we see with the scamming described in the above article demonstrates what has been for at least the past half-century as a standardized ‘modus operandi’: first you presume that whatever you’re looking it is ‘racist’, then you put together whatever bits and pieces of observation can be cobbled together to arrive at the ‘evidence of’ and ‘proof of’ – but of course – ‘racism’, as always and ever by white persons against non-whites. And the game goes on.
The study’s contents reflect confirmation bias. It relies on the naive and those who require proof to satisfy their DEI-driven argumentative nature, even though unbiased evidence was not obtained. The selection process in the study excludes important variables such as state laws and liability, so with the inclusion of confirmation bias, it fails from the start.
SM, what would an actual research methodologist say about this, someone with no stake in the politics either way? Probably a mixed verdict, and worth hearing both sides honestly.
So no, it’s not simply “two locations, therefore junk science.” It’s two locations, a framework applied instead of tested, and conclusions written a lot bigger than the evidence can carry. That’s the version of this critique that holds up under actual scrutiny, not just political pushback.
Olly,
An actual research methodologist with no stake in the politics would agree that a study should be judged strictly by its design and limitations.
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Your scientific illiteracy is in full display.
This paper is a Qualitative Framework Analysis. In this methodology, a framework is not a hypothesis being tested for a “yes or no” answer; it is an analytical grid used to index, categorize, and interpret a large mass of text (73 dense interview transcripts).
The researchers outlined exactly how they coded the interviews, how multiple researchers cross-checked the categories (inter-rater reliability), and how they handled negative cases (interviews that didn’t fit the pattern). The data fit the framework, which makes the application methodologically sound.
You’re trying to reframe it into something that it is not so it fits your biased view. Not the facts or the data presented in the study.
A neutral research methodologist would tell you that this paper did exactly what it set out to do: it conducted a rigorous, multi-site qualitative analysis to explain a specific sociological paradox.
You want to claim that the conclusions are “bigger than the evidence can carry” only because want to stretch a bounded case study into a sweeping national mandate. In effect, you’re moving the goal posts because you want to ignore the facts of the study and smear the authors. The authors stayed within their methodological lanes; you want to railroad them into something they are not.
Actually, YOU have no idea what the in-depth meaning of what you just lifted is about. Hypotheses are not dependent upon “yes or no answers.” And your [mis]understanding of what qualitative framework analyses involve is highly LOL LOL LOL, or hilarious as you would say.
The preconceived “framework” of niceness and whiteness involved condensed re-approaches to already-conducted studies by the same authors, which you would have noticed if you had read it.
Stop pretending that you are something that you are not. Even AI/bots like you are more careful with their assessment, dissection, and re-assertions of relevant previous studies.
“it conducted a rigorous, multi-site qualitative analysis to explain a specific sociological paradox.”
@GSX: Here and elsewhere in your response, you mention 2 more failures of the study. “multi”: If I remember correctly, the study was done in only 2 locations, and the numbers were low.
I am still waiting for you to copy paragraphs from the study. Start with the 19th and then the 23-24th. You said you read the study, and I am asking for proof.
Your replies are on target. Thanks for your input.
S. Meyer, not it doesn’t. I can tell you have not read it. You have no idea what you’re talking about, as usual.
‘You have no idea what you’re talking about, as usual.”
@GSX: Then you should be happy to prove I don’t know what I am talking about, but you won’t. Why? Because you have no critical thinking skills and relied on your “get Turley” input to AI. If you could understand AI’s output, you would have run away in shame.
Go find Sigmund the Fraud and ask for some psychiatric help.
I can prove you don’t know what you’re talking about because what you stated has nothing to do with what the study actually says.
You didn’t cite anything directly from the study or shown any evidence related to the study. You’re just shooting your mouth off as usual.
I have posted excerpts from the study and pointed out exactly why Turley’s claims are false by comparing it to what the study actually says about it’s findings.
No you didn’t. Ex post facto (I suspect we will start seeing you use this term in the future), you only lifted two sentences in the CONCLUSION section of the study. You produced NO “evidence” from the paper that goes against “Turley’s claims.”
I don’t even think your level of reading comprehension allows for you to understand the difference.
I explained some ways of evaluating a study: confirmation bias and selectivity. Having read the study (ha ha) you should easily tell me why I need not be concerned.
I didn’t deal with what Turley said. I dealt with two problems involved with the study. Go ahead and tell me why one need not be concerned about either of them.
It sounds like my recommendation for you to see Sigmund the Fraud for a psych evaluation wasn’t necessary. You have been seeing the Fraud for decades.
Repetition is a common problem seen in inmates of psychiatric institutions and is common before they need to go inside. Have you discussed this obsession with Sigmund the Fraud?
Very interesting comment here by Meyer.
He is quite correct that compulsive repetition of speech and thought are strongly indicative of significant mental illness. The clinical term is perseveration.
We see a classic textbook example of this in Meyer’s responses to Sigmund, whereby he has been obsessively perseverating with the “Final Grade” themed insult. This theme was used once by Sigmund, and Meyer has been compulsively repeating ever since. He has been perseverating with this obsessive behavior for months now, strongly suggesting an underlying psychotic state of mind.
We also see signs of this perseveration in Meyer’s comments of Aug 8 at 7:36pm where he simply repeated the words “slithering” and “sycophant” used by Sigmund. Again, compulsive repetition is a strong indicator for mental illness.
This remarkable comment by Meyer about repetition as a sign of mental illness is perhaps a good sign that he is finally gaining some insight into his psychotic condition.
Recognition and acceptance of mental illness is the first step to recovery.
Congratulations on achieving this milestone !!!!
Wonderful, GSX’s psychiatrist, Sigmund the Fraud, who has a lawn mowing service on the side, has decided to join us. We can see he hasn’t done much good for GSX and less for himself. Some say psychiatrists also treat imbeciles, but that is usually in the inpatient setting. Maybe Sigmund the Fraud has a bed next to GSX. The Fraud points out that I used the words slivering and sycophant in one of my recent responses to him. He doesn’t remember my inclusion of Slime in his last final grade, repeated below.
Final Grade: Slithering Slime, Vapid parasite, and pompous sycophant.
And here we have further proof of Meyer’s obsessive behavior and perseveration.
Even when the perseveration related to the “Final Grade” theme is pointed out to him, he is unable to suppress the obsessive urge to repeat it.
Yes indeed, uncontrollable repetition, obsessive perseveration in all its glory.
And as Meyer has already correctly observed, such behavior is clear cut evidence of profound mental illness.
” the “Final Grade” theme is pointed out to him, he is unable to suppress the obsessive urge to repeat it.”
Always use what works. Now, go oil your lawnmower, lawn boy (Sigmund the Fraud).
Another fascinating response from Meyer.
It appears that he has dropped the perseveration with the “Final Grade” theme, perhaps indicating that in his profoundly impaired mental state he is somehow dimly aware of the point that I have made.
However, the perseveration persists with the “lawn mowing” theme. One obsessive thought has simply been replaced by another, and the perseveration continues uncontrollably.
This is all entirely consistent with Meyer’s self-diagnosis of his own mental illness. As he correctly observed, repetition, perseveration are strong indicators of profound mental illness.
Repetitious!
Final Grade: Illogical Illiterate, Pompous Sycophant, and Repetitious Bore
Self-diagnosed psychotic!
Hysterical.
Final Grade: Illogical Illiterate, Pompous, Psychotic, and Babbling Baffoon.
This sounds more like a Monty Python skit than an academic study. I can just hear John Cleese saying something in his snarky voice about niceness as Whiteness.
If the role of the government is to secure man’s right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness,
then the government should not be in the business of making enemy lists.
Doing so is not conducive to this role.
It is not an enumerated power in Article 2 of the Constitution.
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/
“Now, however, academics have found another undiscovered continent of white privilege: niceness.” (JT)
The tribalistic claim that whites being nice to minorities is racist (aka “nice racism”) has been on the streets for some 20 years. Collectivist academics have just now turned it into a cottage industry.
Here are just a few of those (racist) on-the-street assertions of “racism:”
Compliments, using a light tone of voice (you’re just sublimating a harsh tone), noting shared values (e.g., music), opening a door, helping a distressed minority motorist, offering directions, saying “well said,” a party invitation (aka “tokenism”), saying “well done,” agreement, financial help.
And now we have American professors giving academic respectability to culture-wide racial animosity. Unless reversed, this does not end well.
As a great black orator and thespian once said, “What you talkin’ about Willis?”
This study like many others is just another excuse for why public education, including higher education is a complete failure.
The professors writing these studies are doing nothing more than protecting employment for public educators from kindergarten to college. The studies are nothing more than excuses for the failure of public education at every level.
Colleges did away with SAT testing to open the door for bilking millions more under educated and low IQ students and their parents out of large amounts of money, Leaving students with overwhelming student debt. They did so under the false pretense of racism, equity, and inclusion.
A large percentage of students entering colleges have sub-middle school educations. They are the perfect prey for colleges and professors to prop up the finances of the Colleges and protect professors lucrative employment.
Our public education system from K through college has failed. Young students take on large student debt only to get degrees that are useless or lack financial return.
Our public education system, with politicians leading refuses to except their failure. If they were to do so, their whole lucrative financial structure would fall. Unions wouldn’t get their dues, politicians wouldn’t get their kickbacks from the unions, and public educators wouldn’t retain their jobs.
the best thing we could do for both the students and their parents is exposed the failure of the public education system, and their scam to Profit from their failure.
“Niceness as Whiteness” is so true at the University of Texas at Austin.
From the Police Chief’s chain of command right down to the SRO Cadet, Niceness parading as Whiteness is the truth.
“The eyes of Texas are upon you” if you don’t fit into a congenial profile.
AI: ( what purpose does the University SRO serve )
A University School Resource Officer (SRO) — often acting as a campus police or liaison officer—serves to maintain a safe campus, build trust with the student body, and respond to emergencies. They follow a triad model focused on law enforcement, education, and mentorship.
Law Enforcement and Safety
• Patrol and protect: Keep the campus secure and deter crime.
• Emergency response: Act as the first point of contact during critical incidents or active threats.
• Crisis planning: Help design emergency protocols, evacuation drills, and safety strategies.
Education and Guidance
• Safety instruction: Teach conflict resolution, personal safety, and legal awareness.
• Resource connection: Guide individuals to campus or community support systems.
Mentorship and Community
• Build positive ties: Foster open communication between students and law enforcement.
• Mediate disputes: Help resolve interpersonal conflicts before they turn physical or disruptive.
SRO Cadets (Students as SRO’s) act as; Brownshirt’s, Swat-in-Training, Human Surveillance Units, LEO Apprentice, SRO-ROTC (MPs), under the command of the University Chief of Police (@UT Austin and other US Campuses).
What ‘They’ seem to forget is that the majority of Campus Students and Personnel are just Kids, just starting out feeling the edges & corners of The Box.
There are (at least) two sides to life in America, Civilian and Military (Para-Mil, LEO, Civ-Service, …) Typical SRO Cadets have chosen the Military side of things (path). Of course they are ‘people that want to be on the side that wins’ in order to enhance their lives. The justification of their position and choice in life. It pays out ($) in the long run in a different way than the private sector.
Life’s a Gamble, choose your own path, or it will choose you.
(If you don’t make a choice, the choice will choose You. And many times a SRO is the one that makes it for you.)
Like all Turley posts, this one is highly misleading. Being nice is not white privilege, but cops are using their “niceness” as a cover for their racism. “They used niceness as a strategy for upholding a system of Whiteness that systematically privileges White people and excludes those who fall outside of Whiteness.”
LOL
No shit! This is by far the stupidest argument put forth so far this year!
8
Sally is famed for odd/stupid comments.
So, what about the minority SROs? I guess they’re racist because they’re “white adjacent”?
Is the indispensable right for liberals, too?
Here is what Trump is doing to free speech.
There should be a lawsuit against the Whitehouse.
This is like curtailing voting rights.
No one should take Pakman seriously.
Then why is Trump so afraid of him?
You mistake fear for total disgust.
Something much more interesting,
“If you rely on [MS NOW] for news, I think you’re basically illiterate and uninformed about what’s going on, Epstein told Fox News Digital. “It’s less true for CNN, but also true.”
“I think the news media is missing that, but I think more importantly, they’re missing the nature of the extremism that is happening with the left, and they’re missing the bigotry that is emerging on the left.”
“We’ve seen critical race is basically a permission slip for more bigotries. It’s to divide, tell people the most important thing about them is race and then to start building public policy around that. That’s what critical race is.”
“And now that they have embraced Islamic extremism, they have gone one step further into a sectarian set of beliefs. And I don’t think the news media is covering that, and they should be covering that.”
“But you see the most racist ethno-supremacist movement on the planet, which is the Iranian Axis, which includes Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, that don’t want peace, that have one goal, which is the redemption of a seventh-century caliphate. And the way to achieve that is through the slaughtering, the massacre of Jews first, and then the slaughtering or forced conversion of Christians after that. It is the closest thing to a modern-day Hitler. And the Democratic Party is aligning with that.”
— Julian Epstein
Here is the study abstract…
Yes folks that right, they went into this study with a clear critical race theory agenda which drove them to bias the study by “using a niceness as Whiteness framework”, everything is going to look rosy when you’re looking through biased rose colored glasses.
I take anything that Professors Benjamin Fisher (U. Wisconsin-Madison) is involved in writing as absurd social justice nonsense. As far as I’m concerned, he’s a social justice moron activist promoting critical race theory and DEI.
The following is from the University of Wisconsin…
Yup, DEI and critical race theory activists, don’t trust anything this indoctrinated hack is involved in.
Steve,
Thank you for posting that.
Further evidence how in some parts, higher-education has become even more absurd, i.e. Civil Society & Community Studies.
I’ve dealt with these “cops out of schools”, “school criminalization”, anti-discipline moron activists like Ben Fisher before, here is how actual conversations with these morons tend to transpire.
Politicians In A Political Bubble
Steve, the bio link is useful, worth separating from the personal shot at Fisher though. What it actually shows is that the “framework first” problem isn’t unique to this one paper, it’s consistent with how he approaches the subject generally. His own university describes his research as starting from the premise that school criminalization “disproportionately has negative effects on Black and brown students.” That’s the same structure we’ve been pointing to in the study itself: the conclusion is the starting premise, not something being tested. Worth noting on its own, no need for “moron” or “hack” to make the point land, the pattern speaks for itself.
OLLY wrote, “Worth noting on its own, no need for “moron” or “hack” to make the point land…”
You’re certainly welcome to your opinion on that.
Personally, I think when someone shows a pattern of being a moron or a hack, it really should be pointed out.
Steve, fair, you’re welcome to call it how you see it. My point isn’t that you’re wrong about the pattern. It’s tactical. If the bio quote already shows the framework first problem on its own, calling him a moron or a hack doesn’t strengthen that. It gives people a reason to focus on the insult instead of the pattern. The evidence does the work by itself. Add the label and you hand anyone who wants to dismiss the thread an easy exit. “Oh, they’re just name calling.” Instead of sitting with the actual quote and having to explain it away. I’d rather make the point too solid to dodge than give it a loose thread to pull.
OLLY wrote, “My point isn’t that you’re wrong about the pattern. It’s tactical.”
Now I’m going to be the Devils advocate and put a bit of spin to this…
So I may not necessarily be wrong about the observed pattern just wrong about being bluntly mean.
So as I see it now, my choices are:
1. If I’m “nice” I can be falsely tarred as a racist.
2. If I’m bluntly honest and point out observed patterns using descriptive word(s) some people won’t like then I’m being correctly tarred as being unnecessarily mean.
I choose to be correctly tarred for my actual actions instead of being falsely tarred as a racist.
How do you like my spin? 😉 😉 😉
Steve, clever spin, but there’s a third option you’re skipping. Make the same blunt point about the pattern, minus the personal label. The insult just gives people an easy exit, they attack the tone instead of the argument. Skip it and the point gets a lot harder to dodge.
OLLY wrote, “Make the same blunt point about the pattern, minus the personal label.”
So instead of labeling the person a moron or a hack, you make a blunt point about their actions by telling them that what they did was moronic or hackery, which is literally not calling them names.
I’ve done exactly that and I get the same reactions, I’m being mean for calling them names.
My overall point is; when you’re writing in the comments section of an online blog it really doesn’t matter what you write or how you write it, short of actual personal threats, there will be people that will take offense of your words and attack you for it. So logic dictates that the commenter should simply make their rhetorical choices and stand behind what they write.
Steve Witherspoon is too emotionally unstable to “think” clearly on any subject. The second he’s challenged, he goes off the deep end.
Anonymous wrote, “Steve Witherspoon is too emotionally unstable to “think” clearly on any subject. The second he’s challenged, he goes off the deep end.”
Thank you Anonymous for providing another of your pure ad hominem trolling comments. It’s important that we remind others of your trolling tactics using your own actual comments.
OLLY,
I get what you are saying and agree.
But sometimes Steve’s point about being blatantly blunt cuts to the chase and can be a good laugh! 🙂
Oh, I have the same instinct and could spend hours on here doing that. In fact I done that quite a bit in the past. And I will undoubtably do it again in the future as this blog offers any number of opportunities. But what I’ve learned is to separate the two types of comments.
Steve,
Again, thank you for the chuckle!
Saying while chuckling, good spin.
Or it could be a Bee skit.
Steve,
“Personally, I think when someone shows a pattern of being a moron or a hack, it really should be pointed out.”
Okay, that made me chuckle!
Witherspoon, I bet you didnt’ read the study. It seems to be everyone just does not want to actually read it because it may turn out to be Turley is not being honest with what it actually says.
You dismiss the entire paper as “social justice nonsense” because you dislike the words “DEI” or “Critical Race Theory,” you are engaging in a classic ad hominem attack. It allows you to ignore the actual evidence presented in the study.
You did not address the core data: Why did one district have a student body that was 17% Black, but an arrest rate that was 47% Black?That is a hard, mathematical reality. The authors didn’t manipulate those arrest records; those are the official school district logs. If you want to debunk the study, you have to explain how “nice” policing results in those numbers without relying on the authors’ explanation. Simply screaming “woke” at the authors’ resumes is an emotional deflection, not a factual rebuttal.
X wrote, “Witherspoon, I bet you didnt’ read the study.”
You bet wrong, as usual.
It’s quite foolish of you to make ignorant assumptions like that.
The study is pure critical race theory, DEI, and anti-white nonsense through and through. It’s the same kind of anti-white nonsense as is discussed in this essay, “Whiteness” Culture?
You want to swallow that utter nonsense as if it’s fact, that’s your choice.
I choose differently.
LOL! You didn’t read the study. You skimmed across it and immediately went to the DEI! DEI! DEI!!
Please, you’re as bad as nearly everyone else here. You’re judge ing the study on pure emotion instead of logical and actual facts of the study. It has nothing to do with “whiteness culture”.
If you really read the study you would have noticed the SRO’s interviewed were a mix of white AND black officers. This was about an institutional issue. Not a personal one regarding SRO’s.
Your’e the one making assumptions and being foolish. The emotional reaction is telling and as is usual with your responses devoid of actual evidence of having read the study. Come on Steve.
Well Jonathan, to a Hammer everything looks like a Nail.
I have no idea of the validity of the study, but based on the way Turley frames other issues and agrees with his findings. I suspect there’s a side he didn’t share. He’s describing niceness after an arrest, did there need to be an arrest in the first place? I’m happy that Turley’s children and one commenter never had problems with their children which is hardly the absence of racism. I have seen dozens of videos of Black/brown children being slammed to the ground by SRO’s and a highly disproportionate arrest rate from which the phrase “school to prison pipeline” originates. It is possible that some cases in the study are exaggerated, it’s also possible that SRO’s have learned to be nice after arrests in the same way they thought someone “reached into their waistband,” or “feared for my life.”
Have you watched an episode of Cops or the First 48?
Yeah, it’s those racist Cops s/
enigmainblackcom wrote, “I have seen dozens of videos of Black/brown children being slammed to the ground by SRO’s and a highly disproportionate arrest rate from which the phrase “school to prison pipeline” originates.”
Since I’ve been involved in actively opposing he “cops out of schools” rhetoric for many years, I’ve likely seen a hundred or more such videos involving School Resource Officers (SRO’s). Although there some notable cases where an SRO didn’t follow policing policy & standards and overreacted; however, the vast majority of cases are not an overreaction by an SRO. What you, and others, conveniently leave out of these discussions is the actual behavior of the student just prior to being “slammed to the ground by SRO’s”. The common thread I’ve seen in these “slammed to the ground by SRO’s” videos is the student’s general lack of respect for everyone, including the SRO, and that lack of respect has turned into obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) or the student’s behavior has actually become openly violent.
Some of our adolescent youth make terrible, sometimes life changing, choices when confronted with an LEO. Life is about choices and adolescents need to make better choices and stop blaming everyone else for their own actions.
Lastly; the “school to prison pipeline” is pure agenda driven propaganda, it’s a baldfaced lie and you just chose to parroted it. Choose better.
The school to prison pipeline could be avoided by not causing trouble.
Maybe it’s an agenda that dismisses the “school to prison pipeline” as a baldfaced lie? You could argue the degree that it exists but not that it’s real. I would imagine the SROs are a known entity in the school where they are placed. Perhaps the respect they get is the respect they’ve earned with the students. You did acknowledge some SROs don’t follow policy and standards. What happened to them? Were they dismissed from the force, transferred to another school, or given other assignments to continue their ways?
enigmainblackcom wrote, “You could argue the degree that it [school to prison pipeline] exists but not that it’s real.”
HOGWASH!!!
This isn’t hard but it seems to have completely blown over your head or you’re intentionally being obtuse.
“School to prison pipeline” is pure agenda driven propaganda and it’s a baldfaced lie, period. What’s accurate is there is a “crime to prison pipeline” that you and “cops out of schools” activists completely ignore because that undeniable and inconvenient fact doesn’t fit the agenda narrative.
enigmainblackcom wrote, “Perhaps the respect they get is the respect they’ve earned with the students.”
You should really do some critical thinking about what you just wrote. What you wrote directly implies that officers don’t deserve any level of respect unless they somehow “earn” it in the eyes of the students. I hope that’s not what you teach your children.
enigmainblackcom wrote, “You did acknowledge some SROs don’t follow policy and standards. What happened to them? Were they dismissed from the force, transferred to another school, or given other assignments to continue their ways?”
What happened to officers that blatantly violated policies and standards; well that depends on the kind of violation – some are fired, some are reprimanded and reassigned. You have to submit FOIA to get the full details, do your own homework.
The school to prison pipeline is avoided by not causing trouble.
What I know is that students can avoid the school to prison pipeline by not causing trouble.
In a perfect world, that’s how it would work. This isn’t that world.
“I have no idea of the validity of the study, but based on the way Turley frames …”
There is no way to fail a Rorschach test, but you did.
“I’m happy that Turley’s children and one commenter never had problems with their children which is hardly the absence of racism.”
What is the betting that these school police officers are very quick to work out which children have mummies or daddies that are lawyers? Probably a bigger deterrent to excessive force than the colour of the child’s skin….
The school to prison pipeline can be avoided by not committing crimes.