Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those white people who insist there appears to be no racial motivation, are you so naive as to believe that racists would ever admit to killing a black man because he was black? Or that a white woman would ever admit to being racist even though she made up a story about a threatening black man and called the police?
OK, so you also take the KKK at their word when they claim that they are not "white supremacists"? Yes, continue to believe the criminal over the victims' dead bodies. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kkk-insists-theyre-not-white-supremacists/

Surely, you've heard of Dylann Roof? He said he identifies as a white supremacist and admitted killing the black churchgoers in order to start a race war.

Btw, plenty of Asians don't see the Atlanta shooting as racially motivated. My Asian dh is one of them, and in discussing with his family, they are of the same mindset. They don't see it as the guy hunting down random Asians for their Asian-ness, but punishing the women at the spa where he was having his addiction fueled.

Do you need a list of Karens? Why are you, a white woman, so invested in believing the words of a mass murderer over the facts?

BTW, not all Asian Americans are aware of Asian American history or have studied the history of the sexualization of Asian women. Maybe if he were better educated about his own history, he would have a better sense of the context in which this incident happened.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

Our society is totally obsessed by race. That may be natural in any society with a long history of racism, but it also means we unconsciously forcing racial narratives when the evidence doesn't warrant it. The only evidence we think we need is the race of the victims and that's that.

The killer allegedly shouted something to the effect, “I am gonna kill Asians.” This is from one of the witnesses.

That is an uncorroborate report from a Korean newspaper. Also, the narrative that this was racially motivated emerged before that Korean report. The point is that we immediately jump to race as the primary motivator before the facts come out. Most people on this are positive that this all about race. Even those who may admit misogyny are ignoring the very real connection among misogyny, sex addiction and mental health. And who here even considered the class implications of low income sex workers forced into illegal activities to pay the rent while dealing with abusive men? That's a story as old as Jack the Ripper, yet we are mostlt ignoring it.

Every story has multiple narratives. But we prefer racial narratives to dominate over others whenever possible.

Actually, Asian American advocates are clear that this is about race, gender, and class. Keep up.

People say a lot of things, but the racial is narrative is clearly dominant. I didn't say it was exclusive. Also when I said "who here?" I meant on this thread. Mostly posters are saying they were targetted for their race. Very little discussion about violence against prostitutes.

I didn't even say it's wrong to focus on race. I just think it's it important to notice when you are doing and the real reasons why. But you all seem to have a lot of resistance to doing that kind of work. Racial work is only for other people and only accepted when the "correct" conclusions are drawn.

Yes, and according to you, Hitler was just having a bad day when he was at the end of the rope. According to you, you just need to see what Hitler had to say, that abhorring to H, he felt he needed to eliminate the problem because these people were.... (you fill in the blank).

I said nothing of the kind and neither did anyone else anywhere, ever.

Seems like you are dehumanizing the victims by giving voice to the killer. That’s been done before. Read Hanna Arendt, one of the greatest 20th century Jewish political philosophers whose lover was the great Nazi philosopher Martin Heidegger. She’ll tell you the horrible Nazi officers responsible for the atrocities were actually Ordinary Joes who worked 9-5 jobs - just like me and you. They had no particular motive or animosity for their actions. Hence the banality of evil.

Again, I did nothing of the kind.

I read Hannah Arendt and lots of other people too. Where does she say that discussing a killer's motivations dehumanizes the victims? And if she does say that, who says I have to agree with it? And if I did agree that the banality of evil applied to all Nazi soldiers, where does she say that it also applies to murderers who weren't paid to kill? And what did Arendt say about the banality of Hitler himself? I don't know the answer to that myself, if I read that I forgot it. But her personal library did include Mein Kampf and biographies about Hitler, so presumably she thought it worth it to consider what he had to say.

https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/hannah-arendt-collection-the-life-and-work-of-adolf-hitler-2015-04-24

I see in many of these posts Arendt’s own banality of evil analysis as applied to the killer, constantly asking for “proof” of this or that. Arendt’s analysis is not limited to Eichmann. Her analysis can be applied to anything - Holocaust, slavery, Jim Crow... According Arendt, you need not impute a particular evil motive bc in her analysis, you can always explain people’s action in practical and mundane way. Most people were simply going on about their daily lives doing their 9-5 job, pushing paper, reporting to their bosses, applying for promotion, etc. In the case of the Georgia killer, he might as well have been Camus’ stranger - someone detached, someone who just shot and killed people not knowing why, just going through his reflexive motions. And Yes, Camus’ Stranger straight up blamed the bright sunlight in the hot desert when he was asked why he killed an innocent man. In short, Camus’s Stranger was just having a bad day. There’s no reason to impute any motive beyond his reflexive motions. They just are.

Luckily for Arendt, despite her Nazi Heidegger lover, she was able to put sense in to her analysis. In the end, she was able to separate her need to analyze, constant need for facts, with Eichmann’s actions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those white people who insist there appears to be no racial motivation, are you so naive as to believe that racists would ever admit to killing a black man because he was black? Or that a white woman would ever admit to being racist even though she made up a story about a threatening black man and called the police?
OK, so you also take the KKK at their word when they claim that they are not "white supremacists"? Yes, continue to believe the criminal over the victims' dead bodies. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kkk-insists-theyre-not-white-supremacists/

Considering he did admit to being a mentally ill misogynistic sex addict, I'm not sure that's quite as a big a stretch as you might think.

The article says they refused the label "white supremacist" but discussed all the things they say that are obviously racist and white supremacist, such as calling themselves "white separatists" instead, claiming that America is only for white people, and much more. I think most people other than the KKK agree that white separatism is just a synonym for white supremacy.

Do you know white evangelical culture? Because it's much easier for them to admit to "sexual addiction" than to face their own racism.

https://religionnews.com/2021/03/19/how-pleading-sexual-addiction-protects-men-evangelical-men-robert-aaron-long-atlanta-shooting/

Anonymous wrote:For those white people who insist there appears to be no racial motivation, are you so naive as to believe that racists would ever admit to killing a black man because he was black? Or that a white woman would ever admit to being racist even though she made up a story about a threatening black man and called the police?
OK, so you also take the KKK at their word when they claim that they are not "white supremacists"? Yes, continue to believe the criminal over the victims' dead bodies. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kkk-insists-theyre-not-white-supremacists/

Surely, you've heard of Dylann Roof? He said he identifies as a white supremacist and admitted killing the black churchgoers in order to start a race war.

Btw, plenty of Asians don't see the Atlanta shooting as racially motivated. My Asian dh is one of them, and in discussing with his family, they are of the same mindset. They don't see it as the guy hunting down random Asians for their Asian-ness, but punishing the women at the spa where he was having his addiction fueled.

Anonymous wrote:For those white people who insist there appears to be no racial motivation, are you so naive as to believe that racists would ever admit to killing a black man because he was black? Or that a white woman would ever admit to being racist even though she made up a story about a threatening black man and called the police?
OK, so you also take the KKK at their word when they claim that they are not "white supremacists"? Yes, continue to believe the criminal over the victims' dead bodies. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kkk-insists-theyre-not-white-supremacists/

Considering he did admit to being a mentally ill misogynistic sex addict, I'm not sure that's quite as a big a stretch as you might think.

The article says they refused the label "white supremacist" but discussed all the things they say that are obviously racist and white supremacist, such as calling themselves "white separatists" instead, claiming that America is only for white people, and much more. I think most people other than the KKK agree that white separatism is just a synonym for white supremacy.

For those white people who insist there appears to be no racial motivation, are you so naive as to believe that racists would ever admit to killing a black man because he was black? Or that a white woman would ever admit to being racist even though she made up a story about a threatening black man and called the police?
OK, so you also take the KKK at their word when they claim that they are not "white supremacists"? Yes, continue to believe the criminal over the victims' dead bodies. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kkk-insists-theyre-not-white-supremacists/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

Our society is totally obsessed by race. That may be natural in any society with a long history of racism, but it also means we unconsciously forcing racial narratives when the evidence doesn't warrant it. The only evidence we think we need is the race of the victims and that's that.

The killer allegedly shouted something to the effect, “I am gonna kill Asians.” This is from one of the witnesses.

That is an uncorroborate report from a Korean newspaper. Also, the narrative that this was racially motivated emerged before that Korean report. The point is that we immediately jump to race as the primary motivator before the facts come out. Most people on this are positive that this all about race. Even those who may admit misogyny are ignoring the very real connection among misogyny, sex addiction and mental health. And who here even considered the class implications of low income sex workers forced into illegal activities to pay the rent while dealing with abusive men? That's a story as old as Jack the Ripper, yet we are mostlt ignoring it.

Every story has multiple narratives. But we prefer racial narratives to dominate over others whenever possible.

Actually, Asian American advocates are clear that this is about race, gender, and class. Keep up.

People say a lot of things, but the racial is narrative is clearly dominant. I didn't say it was exclusive. Also when I said "who here?" I meant on this thread. Mostly posters are saying they were targetted for their race. Very little discussion about violence against prostitutes.

I didn't even say it's wrong to focus on race. I just think it's it important to notice when you are doing and the real reasons why. But you all seem to have a lot of resistance to doing that kind of work. Racial work is only for other people and only accepted when the "correct" conclusions are drawn.

Yes, and according to you, Hitler was just having a bad day when he was at the end of the rope. According to you, you just need to see what Hitler had to say, that abhorring to H, he felt he needed to eliminate the problem because these people were.... (you fill in the blank).

I said nothing of the kind and neither did anyone else anywhere, ever.

Seems like you are dehumanizing the victims by giving voice to the killer. That’s been done before. Read Hanna Arendt, one of the greatest 20th century Jewish political philosophers whose lover was the great Nazi philosopher Martin Heidegger. She’ll tell you the horrible Nazi officers responsible for the atrocities were actually Ordinary Joes who worked 9-5 jobs - just like me and you. They had no particular motive or animosity for their actions. Hence the banality of evil.

Again, I did nothing of the kind.

I read Hannah Arendt and lots of other people too. Where does she say that discussing a killer's motivations dehumanizes the victims? And if she does say that, who says I have to agree with it? And if I did agree that the banality of evil applied to all Nazi soldiers, where does she say that it also applies to murderers who weren't paid to kill? And what did Arendt say about the banality of Hitler himself? I don't know the answer to that myself, if I read that I forgot it. But her personal library did include Mein Kampf and biographies about Hitler, so presumably she thought it worth it to consider what he had to say.

https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/hannah-arendt-collection-the-life-and-work-of-adolf-hitler-2015-04-24

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

Our society is totally obsessed by race. That may be natural in any society with a long history of racism, but it also means we unconsciously forcing racial narratives when the evidence doesn't warrant it. The only evidence we think we need is the race of the victims and that's that.

What do you mean by "obsessed"? Do you mean you're feelings are hurt and you're emotionally spent because you now have to think about your whiteness and how that whiteness plays a role in a highly radicalized society? Because welcome to my life. As an Asian American woman, I have never had the luxury of NOT thinking about my race or my sex. We are not "unconsciously" forcing racial narratives when we personally have experienced decades of racist and misogynistic comments from white men, when we have seen an exponential rise in crimes against Asian Americans with the rise of Trump and his racist dog-whistles, and when we see a white man blame his Christian evangelical Southern Baptist-informed "sex addition" on fetishized Asian women to justify his murder of six of them in a deeply racist southern state. It's appalling to me that you not only fail to connect the dots, but that you refuse to admit the likely pattern.

But you are calling it fact. Is it likely, or is it definite. Because people on this board are insisting it's definite. Doesn't matter though. It has to hold up in a court of law, as we are a country of laws.

We were a country of "laws" under Jim Crow. Would you have defended the courts back then, too? The sheriff's office spokesperson, who sold "Chy-na virus" t-shirts, explained that the murderer had a "bad day." Why do you think that laws and the people enforce them are infallible?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

Our society is totally obsessed by race. That may be natural in any society with a long history of racism, but it also means we unconsciously forcing racial narratives when the evidence doesn't warrant it. The only evidence we think we need is the race of the victims and that's that.

The killer allegedly shouted something to the effect, “I am gonna kill Asians.” This is from one of the witnesses.

That is an uncorroborate report from a Korean newspaper. Also, the narrative that this was racially motivated emerged before that Korean report. The point is that we immediately jump to race as the primary motivator before the facts come out. Most people on this are positive that this all about race. Even those who may admit misogyny are ignoring the very real connection among misogyny, sex addiction and mental health. And who here even considered the class implications of low income sex workers forced into illegal activities to pay the rent while dealing with abusive men? That's a story as old as Jack the Ripper, yet we are mostlt ignoring it.

Every story has multiple narratives. But we prefer racial narratives to dominate over others whenever possible.

Actually, Asian American advocates are clear that this is about race, gender, and class. Keep up.

People say a lot of things, but the racial is narrative is clearly dominant. I didn't say it was exclusive. Also when I said "who here?" I meant on this thread. Mostly posters are saying they were targetted for their race. Very little discussion about violence against prostitutes.

I didn't even say it's wrong to focus on race. I just think it's it important to notice when you are doing and the real reasons why. But you all seem to have a lot of resistance to doing that kind of work. Racial work is only for other people and only accepted when the "correct" conclusions are drawn.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

Our society is totally obsessed by race. That may be natural in any society with a long history of racism, but it also means we unconsciously forcing racial narratives when the evidence doesn't warrant it. The only evidence we think we need is the race of the victims and that's that.

What do you mean by "obsessed"? Do you mean you're feelings are hurt and you're emotionally spent because you now have to think about your whiteness and how that whiteness plays a role in a highly radicalized society? Because welcome to my life. As an Asian American woman, I have never had the luxury of NOT thinking about my race or my sex. We are not "unconsciously" forcing racial narratives when we personally have experienced decades of racist and misogynistic comments from white men, when we have seen an exponential rise in crimes against Asian Americans with the rise of Trump and his racist dog-whistles, and when we see a white man blame his Christian evangelical Southern Baptist-informed "sex addition" on fetishized Asian women to justify his murder of six of them in a deeply racist southern state. It's appalling to me that you not only fail to connect the dots, but that you refuse to admit the likely pattern.

But you are calling it fact. Is it likely, or is it definite. Because people on this board are insisting it's definite. Doesn't matter though. It has to hold up in a court of law, as we are a country of laws.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

You probably live under a rock.

I’m fairly tuned in. I don’t understand why the insistence that this is a racial hate crime before evidence is collected. I agree it might be. But the evidence hasn’t been presented yet and there are other factors that explain the majority of victims’ identities.

Some people are just slow on the uptake when it comes to being on the right side of history. Genuinely curious - if you had lived in the past, given what you know about who you are and your point of view, how long would it have taken you to admit that Jim Crow laws were racist? That segregation of schools was wrong? That Hitler was an anti-Semite? Would you have ever admitted to these things, or would have waited until it was too late?

You know nothing about me. I would have called it the second I saw it in all cases you mention. You are a bigot beyond belief and have no interests in facts. You are no better than Donald Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

Our society is totally obsessed by race. That may be natural in any society with a long history of racism, but it also means we unconsciously forcing racial narratives when the evidence doesn't warrant it. The only evidence we think we need is the race of the victims and that's that.

The killer allegedly shouted something to the effect, “I am gonna kill Asians.” This is from one of the witnesses.

That is an uncorroborate report from a Korean newspaper. Also, the narrative that this was racially motivated emerged before that Korean report. The point is that we immediately jump to race as the primary motivator before the facts come out. Most people on this are positive that this all about race. Even those who may admit misogyny are ignoring the very real connection among misogyny, sex addiction and mental health. And who here even considered the class implications of low income sex workers forced into illegal activities to pay the rent while dealing with abusive men? That's a story as old as Jack the Ripper, yet we are mostlt ignoring it.

Every story has multiple narratives. But we prefer racial narratives to dominate over others whenever possible.

Actually, Asian American advocates are clear that this is about race, gender, and class. Keep up.

People say a lot of things, but the racial is narrative is clearly dominant. I didn't say it was exclusive. Also when I said "who here?" I meant on this thread. Mostly posters are saying they were targetted for their race. Very little discussion about violence against prostitutes.

I didn't even say it's wrong to focus on race. I just think it's it important to notice when you are doing and the real reasons why. But you all seem to have a lot of resistance to doing that kind of work. Racial work is only for other people and only accepted when the "correct" conclusions are drawn.

Yes, and according to you, Hitler was just having a bad day when he was at the end of the rope. According to you, you just need to see what Hitler had to say, that abhorring to H, he felt he needed to eliminate the problem because these people were.... (you fill in the blank).

I said nothing of the kind and neither did anyone else anywhere, ever.

Seems like you are dehumanizing the victims by giving voice to the killer. That’s been done before. Read Hanna Arendt, one of the greatest 20th century Jewish political philosophers whose lover was the great Nazi philosopher Martin Heidegger. She’ll tell you the horrible Nazi officers responsible for the atrocities were actually Ordinary Joes who worked 9-5 jobs - just like me and you. They had no particular motive or animosity for their actions. Hence the banality of evil.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

Our society is totally obsessed by race. That may be natural in any society with a long history of racism, but it also means we unconsciously forcing racial narratives when the evidence doesn't warrant it. The only evidence we think we need is the race of the victims and that's that.

The killer allegedly shouted something to the effect, “I am gonna kill Asians.” This is from one of the witnesses.

That is an uncorroborate report from a Korean newspaper. Also, the narrative that this was racially motivated emerged before that Korean report. The point is that we immediately jump to race as the primary motivator before the facts come out. Most people on this are positive that this all about race. Even those who may admit misogyny are ignoring the very real connection among misogyny, sex addiction and mental health. And who here even considered the class implications of low income sex workers forced into illegal activities to pay the rent while dealing with abusive men? That's a story as old as Jack the Ripper, yet we are mostlt ignoring it.

Every story has multiple narratives. But we prefer racial narratives to dominate over others whenever possible.

Actually, Asian American advocates are clear that this is about race, gender, and class. Keep up.

People say a lot of things, but the racial is narrative is clearly dominant. I didn't say it was exclusive. Also when I said "who here?" I meant on this thread. Mostly posters are saying they were targetted for their race. Very little discussion about violence against prostitutes.

I didn't even say it's wrong to focus on race. I just think it's it important to notice when you are doing and the real reasons why. But you all seem to have a lot of resistance to doing that kind of work. Racial work is only for other people and only accepted when the "correct" conclusions are drawn.

Yes, and according to you, Hitler was just having a bad day when he was at the end of the rope. According to you, you just need to see what Hitler had to say, that abhorring to H, he felt he needed to eliminate the problem because these people were.... (you fill in the blank).

I said nothing of the kind and neither did anyone else anywhere, ever.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

Our society is totally obsessed by race. That may be natural in any society with a long history of racism, but it also means we unconsciously forcing racial narratives when the evidence doesn't warrant it. The only evidence we think we need is the race of the victims and that's that.

The killer allegedly shouted something to the effect, “I am gonna kill Asians.” This is from one of the witnesses.

That is an uncorroborate report from a Korean newspaper. Also, the narrative that this was racially motivated emerged before that Korean report. The point is that we immediately jump to race as the primary motivator before the facts come out. Most people on this are positive that this all about race. Even those who may admit misogyny are ignoring the very real connection among misogyny, sex addiction and mental health. And who here even considered the class implications of low income sex workers forced into illegal activities to pay the rent while dealing with abusive men? That's a story as old as Jack the Ripper, yet we are mostlt ignoring it.

Every story has multiple narratives. But we prefer racial narratives to dominate over others whenever possible.

Actually, Asian American advocates are clear that this is about race, gender, and class. Keep up.

People say a lot of things, but the racial is narrative is clearly dominant. I didn't say it was exclusive. Also when I said "who here?" I meant on this thread. Mostly posters are saying they were targetted for their race. Very little discussion about violence against prostitutes.

I didn't even say it's wrong to focus on race. I just think it's it important to notice when you are doing and the real reasons why. But you all seem to have a lot of resistance to doing that kind of work. Racial work is only for other people and only accepted when the "correct" conclusions are drawn.

Yes, and according to you, Hitler was just having a bad day when he was at the end of the rope. According to you, you just need to see what Hitler had to say, that abhorring to H, he felt he needed to eliminate the problem because these people were.... (you fill in the blank).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The recent wave of crimes against Asians is the worst in the last thirty years as far as I remembered. Yet very few of these crimes are classified as hate crimes. I have yet to see an announcement from FBI that they are investing the massage shooting to find out if this is a hate crime.

Aren’t there certain markers of hate crimes that need to be in evidence to classify? Are all crimes hate crimes?

In order to control public outrage, isn’t it better to say there is no evidence of a hate crime if it’s the truth? It doesn’t mean they won’t bring evidence to light if it’s found.

You mean, it’s better for white audiences to hear that a white man doesn’t seem to have committed a racially motivated crime? Because that is not what Asian Americans and women want to hear.

Not saying that. But why do groups *want* to hear their group is a target of something if the evidence isn’t there (yet)? I can’t understand that.

Our society is totally obsessed by race. That may be natural in any society with a long history of racism, but it also means we unconsciously forcing racial narratives when the evidence doesn't warrant it. The only evidence we think we need is the race of the victims and that's that.

The killer allegedly shouted something to the effect, “I am gonna kill Asians.” This is from one of the witnesses.

That is an uncorroborate report from a Korean newspaper. Also, the narrative that this was racially motivated emerged before that Korean report. The point is that we immediately jump to race as the primary motivator before the facts come out. Most people on this are positive that this all about race. Even those who may admit misogyny are ignoring the very real connection among misogyny, sex addiction and mental health. And who here even considered the class implications of low income sex workers forced into illegal activities to pay the rent while dealing with abusive men? That's a story as old as Jack the Ripper, yet we are mostlt ignoring it.

Every story has multiple narratives. But we prefer racial narratives to dominate over others whenever possible.

Actually, Asian American advocates are clear that this is about race, gender, and class. Keep up.

People say a lot of things, but the racial is narrative is clearly dominant. I didn't say it was exclusive. Also when I said "who here?" I meant on this thread. Mostly posters are saying they were targetted for their race. Very little discussion about violence against prostitutes.

I didn't even say it's wrong to focus on race. I just think it's it important to notice when you are doing and the real reasons why. But you all seem to have a lot of resistance to doing that kind of work. Racial work is only for other people and only accepted when the "correct" conclusions are drawn.