8 dead in Atlanta, Georgia Mass shootings

[Purgatio]

People keep saying that. They don't tend to say how they know.

If he was targeting prostitutes primarily, and went to 3 different parlours, the parlours nearby would have to be 87% Asian for there to be even a 50% chance of it being a co-incidence. (This may be wrong, however the fact that he went to 3 parlours to get his fill of killing makes it unlikely that Asians, OR Prostitutes were targets of opportunity ... or "coincidences" ... and astoundingly, he targeted Asian Prostitutes.)

It's still plausible that Asians were the only kind of prostitute he'd ever frequented, either because of price or some dehumanization on his part, and he fixated on the 'type' as being more abhorrent than either race or role.

Spanish whore houses primarily cater to the Spanish, the vast majority of these places that are accessible are Asian.

Just cause people want to make it about yet another white man hating on Asians, doesn't make it true.

They're not mutually-exclusive though. Stereotypes all come from somewhere and are reinforced by societal circumstances. Just because the majority of massage parlours in this Atlanta area allegedly doubling as peddlers of prostitution are run by Asians and the majority of employees there are Asian, doesn't mean the attack can't be both motivated by race and prejudice against sex workers. Racial disproportionality amongst sex workers makes it even more likely that that is the case. This attack happened in a country with a very pernicious and frightening history of the systemic fetishisation of East Asian women as submissive sexual objects who exist for the sexual gratification of white men, and if its in fact true that the "vast majority" of the workers in such places that are "accessible" to consumers are Asian, as you've said in your post, that would only serve to reinforce that negative stereotypes and association in the mind of the Atlanta shooter.

Like I've said already in this thread, I'm not a mindreader, no one can say for certain whether this was racially-motivated or not. But given the historical and cultural context, and the negative and racist associations between sex work and Asian-Americans that are often perpetuated by precisely the social facts you are referencing here, one can't really just dismiss this as a case of "crazy activists wanna make this about a white man hating on Asians" for 'no good reason' whatsoever. Conversations about racism are naturally sparked by tragedy. And racists don't often give open confessions of their hateful or prejudiced views. That doesn't stop us from examining the historical and cultural context behind prejudicial attitudes and the relevance they have in shaping the worldviews of persons acculturated in that nation, where that context is plainly relevant to the attack in question.

[Ethel mermania]

Spanish whore houses primarily cater to the Spanish, the vast majority of these places that are accessible are Asian.

Just cause people want to make it about yet another white man hating on Asians, doesn't make it true.

They're not mutually-exclusive though. Stereotypes all come from somewhere and are reinforced by societal circumstances. Just because the majority of massage parlours in this Atlanta area allegedly doubling as peddlers of prostitution are run by Asians and the majority of employees there are Asian, doesn't mean the attack can't be both motivated by race and prejudice against sex workers. Racial disproportionality amongst sex workers makes it even more likely that that is the case. This attack happened in a country with a very pernicious and frightening history of the systemic fetishisation of East Asian women as submissive sexual objects who exist for the sexual gratification of white men, and if its in fact true that the "vast majority" of the workers in such places that are "accessible" to consumers are Asian, as you've said in your post, that would only serve to reinforce that negative stereotypes and association in the mind of the Atlanta shooter.

Like I've said already in this thread, I'm not a mindreader, no one can say for certain whether this was racially-motivated or not. But given the historical and cultural context, and the negative and racist associations between sex work and Asian-Americans that are often perpetuated by precisely the social facts you are referencing here, one can't really just dismiss this as a case of "crazy activists wanna make this about a white man hating on Asians" for 'no good reason' whatsoever. Conversations about racism are naturally sparked by tragedy. And racists don't often give open confessions of their hateful or prejudiced views. That doesn't stop us from examining the historical and cultural context behind prejudicial attitudes and the relevance they have in shaping the worldviews of persons acculturated in that nation, where that context is plainly relevant to the attack in question.

So you are telling me if 90% of the girls are asian for reasons, and the guy shoots up the places and kills 75% asians its racism on his part.

No

[Purgatio]

They're not mutually-exclusive though. Stereotypes all come from somewhere and are reinforced by societal circumstances. Just because the majority of massage parlours in this Atlanta area allegedly doubling as peddlers of prostitution are run by Asians and the majority of employees there are Asian, doesn't mean the attack can't be both motivated by race and prejudice against sex workers. Racial disproportionality amongst sex workers makes it even more likely that that is the case. This attack happened in a country with a very pernicious and frightening history of the systemic fetishisation of East Asian women as submissive sexual objects who exist for the sexual gratification of white men, and if its in fact true that the "vast majority" of the workers in such places that are "accessible" to consumers are Asian, as you've said in your post, that would only serve to reinforce that negative stereotypes and association in the mind of the Atlanta shooter.

Like I've said already in this thread, I'm not a mindreader, no one can say for certain whether this was racially-motivated or not. But given the historical and cultural context, and the negative and racist associations between sex work and Asian-Americans that are often perpetuated by precisely the social facts you are referencing here, one can't really just dismiss this as a case of "crazy activists wanna make this about a white man hating on Asians" for 'no good reason' whatsoever. Conversations about racism are naturally sparked by tragedy. And racists don't often give open confessions of their hateful or prejudiced views. That doesn't stop us from examining the historical and cultural context behind prejudicial attitudes and the relevance they have in shaping the worldviews of persons acculturated in that nation, where that context is plainly relevant to the attack in question.

So you are telling me if 90% of the girls are asian for reasons, and the guy shoots up the places and kills 75% asians its racism on his part.

No

I mean, sure, if you're gonna be reductive and just ignore all the nuance in the argument I made, go ahead I guess.

Here's a better analogy. Imagine a guy went on a shooting spree in an overwhelmingly-black neighbourhood, killing 8 people, 6 of them black men. Imagine said guy told the police he had zero racial motivations for said shooting, and he only wanted to kill "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals". Imagine the media pointed out that subconscious racial bias is a thing, that racial stereotypes and presumptions and assumptions are shaped by the culture we grow up in, and the history of the nation this shooter grew up in has a long, extensive, consistent history of stereotyping black men as "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals". Imagine online posters wanted to point out, reasonably, and with sufficient nuance and disclaimers, that while one cannot definitively say this hypothetical shooter was racially-motivated, it would be wrong to decontextualise the shooting and isolate it from the highly-relevant history of racial stereotyping of black men, and maybe, just maybe, it can spark an equally-relevant conversation about the racial stereotyping of black men and how it could have (even if we can't be 100% sure of it, as is true of most things) played a role, consciously or subconsciously, in the decision of this hypothetical shooter to start shooting up an overwhelmingly-black neighbourhood, kill overwhelmingly-black victims, on the pretext of killing "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals", in a country with a history of associating those negative traits with black people.

Then imagine, in response to that nuanced and balanced argument, someone came along to oversimplify and strawman it by responding "oh, so if the neighbourhood is 90% black and 75% of his victims are black, its racism? no", as if the relative proportion of black people in a small sample size of 8 people (susceptible to being out-of-proportion to the general neighbourhood simply owing to random error and the fact that 8 is a small enough number that that kind of out-of-proportion outcome is all the more likely, whether or not a shooting is racially-motivated) in any way negates the argument about racial stereotyping, subconscious bias, and how its impossible to ignore the very strong similarities between the shooter's stated reason for killing his victims, the racial makeup of the neighbourhood he targeted, and the prevailing racial stereotypes in the society he grew up in.

That's a more accurate analogy or description of this conversation.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

People keep saying that. They don't tend to say how they know.

If he was targeting prostitutes primarily, and went to 3 different parlours, the parlours nearby would have to be 87% Asian for there to be even a 50% chance of it being a co-incidence. (This may be wrong, however the fact that he went to 3 parlours to get his fill of killing makes it unlikely that Asians, OR Prostitutes were targets of opportunity ... or "coincidences" ... and astoundingly, he targeted Asian Prostitutes.)

It's still plausible that Asians were the only kind of prostitute he'd ever frequented, either because of price or some dehumanization on his part, and he fixated on the 'type' as being more abhorrent than either race or role.

Spanish whore houses primarily cater to the Spanish, the vast majority of these places that are accessible are Asian.

Just cause people want to make it about yet another white man hating on Asians, doesn't make it true.

I have repeatedly championed mixed motives: the victims being sex workers is at least as significant as them being from Korea. There's also a sense in which the motives don't matter: the guy was that fucked in the head that we shouldn't try to draw strong lessons about how People Like Him think, from what he did. It may be futile to do so, and we won't be confirmed or disaffirmed if he successfully makes an insanity plea.

You however have just defied a Moderation ruling and implied that the victims in some sense deserved to be killed, for working in a "whore house". The w-word is derogatory, and you're not so stupid as to thing w-h does not derogate the people who work there. Either you're defying moderation from spite, or you're drunk, but neither is a good excuse.

It is irrelevant to me whether you can back the claim that massage parlours in his part of Atlanta have Asian workers so overwhelmingly that Asian bias in the victims is purely incidental on him going after all the prostitutes he could find. That may be true, but I don't care, because establishing his main motive as "kill prostitutes" does not rule out other motives.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

So you are telling me if 90% of the girls are asian for reasons, and the guy shoots up the places and kills 75% asians its racism on his part.

Where are you getting that figure? Actually, either of those figures?

[Ethel mermania]

So you are telling me if 90% of the girls are asian for reasons, and the guy shoots up the places and kills 75% asians its racism on his part.

No

I mean, sure, if you're gonna be reductive and just ignore all the nuance in the argument I made, go ahead I guess.

Here's a better analogy. Imagine a guy went on a shooting spree in an overwhelmingly-black neighbourhood, killing 8 people, 6 of them black men. Imagine said guy told the police he had zero racial motivations for said shooting, and he only wanted to kill "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals". Imagine the media pointed out that subconscious racial bias is a thing, that racial stereotypes and presumptions and assumptions are shaped by the culture we grow up in, and the history of the nation this shooter grew up in has a long, extensive, consistent history of stereotyping black men as "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals". Imagine online posters wanted to point out, reasonably, and with sufficient nuance and disclaimers, that while one cannot definitively say this hypothetical shooter was racially-motivated, it would be wrong to decontextualise the shooting and isolate it from the highly-relevant history of racial stereotyping of black men, and maybe, just maybe, it can spark an equally-relevant conversation about the racial stereotyping of black men and how it could have (even if we can't be 100% sure of it, as is true of most things) played a role, consciously or subconsciously, in the decision of this hypothetical shooter to start shooting up an overwhelmingly-black neighbourhood, kill overwhelmingly-black victims, on the pretext of killing "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals", in a country with a history of associating those negative traits with black people.

Then imagine, in response to that nuanced and balanced argument, someone came along to oversimplify and strawman it by responding "oh, so if the neighbourhood is 90% black and 75% of his victims are black, its racism? no", as if the relative proportion of black people in a small sample size of 8 people (susceptible to being out-of-proportion to the general neighbourhood simply owing to random error and the fact that 8 is a small enough number that that kind of out-of-proportion outcome is all the more likely, whether or not a shooting is racially-motivated) in any way negates the argument about racial stereotyping, subconscious bias, and how its impossible to ignore the very strong similarities between the shooter's stated reason for killing his victims, the racial makeup of the neighbourhood he targeted, and the prevailing racial stereotypes in the society he grew up in.

That's a more accurate analogy or description of this conversation.

No it isn't.
The guy was conflicted between his desire for sex and desire for the lord. The places he used were Asian because that is what the accessible supply is. He shot them up because that is where he knew to go. He doesn't know the Latin places because he never went there, (and they probably wouldn't take him), but that's another topic.

Your scenario is describing someone who hates blacks to start and is looking to hide it, and that is not what happened here

[Ethel mermania]

So you are telling me if 90% of the girls are asian for reasons, and the guy shoots up the places and kills 75% asians its racism on his part.

Where are you getting that figure? Actually, either of those figures?

Come to ny, we will take a walk. The 90% is an estimate, based on am article i posted earlier. The Asian places are ubiquitous all around the city and are storefronts. 40 years ago there would be Latin places in sone these neighborhoods, but those have disappeared, and tend to be in apartments in Spanish neighborhoods.

75% he shot 6 Asians and two white ls because he thought they were whores.

[Purgatio]

I mean, sure, if you're gonna be reductive and just ignore all the nuance in the argument I made, go ahead I guess.

Here's a better analogy. Imagine a guy went on a shooting spree in an overwhelmingly-black neighbourhood, killing 8 people, 6 of them black men. Imagine said guy told the police he had zero racial motivations for said shooting, and he only wanted to kill "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals". Imagine the media pointed out that subconscious racial bias is a thing, that racial stereotypes and presumptions and assumptions are shaped by the culture we grow up in, and the history of the nation this shooter grew up in has a long, extensive, consistent history of stereotyping black men as "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals". Imagine online posters wanted to point out, reasonably, and with sufficient nuance and disclaimers, that while one cannot definitively say this hypothetical shooter was racially-motivated, it would be wrong to decontextualise the shooting and isolate it from the highly-relevant history of racial stereotyping of black men, and maybe, just maybe, it can spark an equally-relevant conversation about the racial stereotyping of black men and how it could have (even if we can't be 100% sure of it, as is true of most things) played a role, consciously or subconsciously, in the decision of this hypothetical shooter to start shooting up an overwhelmingly-black neighbourhood, kill overwhelmingly-black victims, on the pretext of killing "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals", in a country with a history of associating those negative traits with black people.

Then imagine, in response to that nuanced and balanced argument, someone came along to oversimplify and strawman it by responding "oh, so if the neighbourhood is 90% black and 75% of his victims are black, its racism? no", as if the relative proportion of black people in a small sample size of 8 people (susceptible to being out-of-proportion to the general neighbourhood simply owing to random error and the fact that 8 is a small enough number that that kind of out-of-proportion outcome is all the more likely, whether or not a shooting is racially-motivated) in any way negates the argument about racial stereotyping, subconscious bias, and how its impossible to ignore the very strong similarities between the shooter's stated reason for killing his victims, the racial makeup of the neighbourhood he targeted, and the prevailing racial stereotypes in the society he grew up in.

That's a more accurate analogy or description of this conversation.

No it isn't.
The guy was conflicted between his desire for sex and desire for the lord. The places he used were Asian because that is what the accessible supply is. He shot them up because that is where he knew to go. He doesn't know the Latin places because he never went there, (and they probably wouldn't take him), but that's another topic.

Your scenario is describing someone who hates blacks to start and is looking to hide it, and that is not what happened here

What? How exactly are the scenarios different here? Why is one about a man who has absolutely no negative stereotypes about Asians and the other about a man who "hates black to start and is looking to hide it"? Why are you more willing to infer a racial motivation in one and not the other? The two scenarios are exactly the same, the only difference is the race of the victims and the claimed/purported motivation for the killing. In all other respects they are the same. Both involve killers who claim to have zero racial motivation for targeting their victims. Both involve killers who have proffered an alternative explanation for targeting their victims which, on its face, appears race-neutral. Both involve killers whose race-neutral explanations have a striking similarity to historical racial stereotypes and negative associations between the race of the victims and the pejorative characteristic in question, racial stereotypes that persist to the present day in the culture and society that the killer grew up in. So why is it that one killer obviously "hates blacks", but the other has zero racial prejudices or feelings about Asians whatsoever and his stated motivation for killing his victims can be taken at face value without reading any racial prejudice into it (even though you don't take the same approach with the hypothetical killer in my example, and just conclude he's a guy who hates criminals and gang-bangers with zero negative feelings about blacks)?

Btw, just to be clear, when you say this guy is "conflicted between his desire for sex and desire for the Lord", I completely and 100% agree with that. I wrote a lengthy post in this forum articulating precisely that view. But it isn't mutually exclusive. Long can be that, AND ALSO prejudiced against East Asian women, particularly if that prejudice is an implicit racial association between East Asians and prostitution/sex work, which fits neatly into the reason you've proffered for why he killed these victims and targeted them. BOTH can be true.

I need to double-check with you something because it seems like you're dancing around the critical point here - are you denying that there's a history of racial fetishisation and ethnically-based sexual objectification of East Asian women in US history, media, and culture? Are you denying that there's a prevalent racial stereotype of East Asian women as accessible submissive sex objects whose sexualities exist for the benefit of white Western men, constantly perpetuated by stereotypical media depictions of those women in many aspects of American life, particularly the pornography industry? Are you denying that there's a negative racial stereotype between East Asians and sex work/prostitution?

Because if you disagree with all that, you really need to read up about the history of East Asian stereotypes in the United States. And if you agree with all that, I don't understand why you're so readily dismissive of the crazy, radical idea that maybe this guy was prejudiced against sex workers and prostitutes, AND this was racially-motivated owing to a prevalent cultural stereotype and implicit racial association between East Asian women and prostitution, perpetuated by many sectors of American culture and society? Why is that so hard to believe? Why are you so quick to reject that possibility out-of-hand?

[Ethel mermania]

No it isn't.
The guy was conflicted between his desire for sex and desire for the lord. The places he used were Asian because that is what the accessible supply is. He shot them up because that is where he knew to go. He doesn't know the Latin places because he never went there, (and they probably wouldn't take him), but that's another topic.

Your scenario is describing someone who hates blacks to start and is looking to hide it, and that is not what happened here

What? How exactly are the scenarios different here? Why is one about a man who has absolutely no negative stereotypes about Asians and the other about a man who "hates black to start and is looking to hide it"? Why are you more willing to infer a racial motivation in one and not the other? The two scenarios are exactly the same, the only difference is the race of the victims and the claimed/purported motivation for the killing. In all other respects they are the same. Both involve killers who claim to have zero racial motivation for targeting their victims. Both involve killers who have proffered an alternative explanation for targeting their victims which, on its face, appears race-neutral. Both involve killers whose race-neutral explanations have a striking similarity to historical racial stereotypes and negative associations between the race of the victims and the pejorative characteristic in question, racial stereotypes that persist to the present day in the culture and society that the killer grew up in. So why is it that one killer obviously "hates blacks", but the other has zero racial prejudices or feelings about Asians whatsoever and his stated motivation for killing his victims can be taken at face value without reading any racial prejudice into it (even though you don't take the same approach with the hypothetical killer in my example, and just conclude he's a guy who hates criminals and gang-bangers with zero negative feelings about blacks)?

Btw, just to be clear, when you say this guy is "conflicted between his desire for sex and desire for the Lord", I completely and 100% agree with that. I wrote a lengthy post in this forum articulating precisely that view. But it isn't mutually exclusive. Long can be that, AND ALSO prejudiced against East Asian women, particularly if that prejudice is an implicit racial association between East Asians and prostitution/sex work, which fits neatly into the reason you've proffered for why he killed these victims and targeted them. BOTH can be true.

I need to double-check with you something because it seems like you're dancing around the critical point here - are you denying that there's a history of racial fetishisation and ethnically-based sexual objectification of East Asian women in US history, media, and culture? Are you denying that there's a prevalent racial stereotype of East Asian women as accessible submissive sex objects whose sexualities exist for the benefit of white Western men, constantly perpetuated by stereotypical media depictions of those women in many aspects of American life, particularly the pornography industry? Are you denying that there's a negative racial stereotype between East Asians and sex work/prostitution?

Because if you disagree with all that, you really need to read up about the history of East Asian stereotypes in the United States. And if you agree with all that, I don't understand why you're so readily dismissive of the crazy, radical idea that maybe this guy was prejudiced against sex workers and prostitutes, AND this was racially-motivated owing to a prevalent cultural stereotype and implicit racial association between East Asian women and prostitution, perpetuated by many sectors of American culture and society? Why is that so hard to believe? Why are you so quick to reject that possibility out-of-hand?

The scenario s are different because you made them different to quote:

...the pretext of killing "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals", in a country with a history of associating those negative traits with black people.....

[Purgatio]

What? How exactly are the scenarios different here? Why is one about a man who has absolutely no negative stereotypes about Asians and the other about a man who "hates black to start and is looking to hide it"? Why are you more willing to infer a racial motivation in one and not the other? The two scenarios are exactly the same, the only difference is the race of the victims and the claimed/purported motivation for the killing. In all other respects they are the same. Both involve killers who claim to have zero racial motivation for targeting their victims. Both involve killers who have proffered an alternative explanation for targeting their victims which, on its face, appears race-neutral. Both involve killers whose race-neutral explanations have a striking similarity to historical racial stereotypes and negative associations between the race of the victims and the pejorative characteristic in question, racial stereotypes that persist to the present day in the culture and society that the killer grew up in. So why is it that one killer obviously "hates blacks", but the other has zero racial prejudices or feelings about Asians whatsoever and his stated motivation for killing his victims can be taken at face value without reading any racial prejudice into it (even though you don't take the same approach with the hypothetical killer in my example, and just conclude he's a guy who hates criminals and gang-bangers with zero negative feelings about blacks)?

Btw, just to be clear, when you say this guy is "conflicted between his desire for sex and desire for the Lord", I completely and 100% agree with that. I wrote a lengthy post in this forum articulating precisely that view. But it isn't mutually exclusive. Long can be that, AND ALSO prejudiced against East Asian women, particularly if that prejudice is an implicit racial association between East Asians and prostitution/sex work, which fits neatly into the reason you've proffered for why he killed these victims and targeted them. BOTH can be true.

I need to double-check with you something because it seems like you're dancing around the critical point here - are you denying that there's a history of racial fetishisation and ethnically-based sexual objectification of East Asian women in US history, media, and culture? Are you denying that there's a prevalent racial stereotype of East Asian women as accessible submissive sex objects whose sexualities exist for the benefit of white Western men, constantly perpetuated by stereotypical media depictions of those women in many aspects of American life, particularly the pornography industry? Are you denying that there's a negative racial stereotype between East Asians and sex work/prostitution?

Because if you disagree with all that, you really need to read up about the history of East Asian stereotypes in the United States. And if you agree with all that, I don't understand why you're so readily dismissive of the crazy, radical idea that maybe this guy was prejudiced against sex workers and prostitutes, AND this was racially-motivated owing to a prevalent cultural stereotype and implicit racial association between East Asian women and prostitution, perpetuated by many sectors of American culture and society? Why is that so hard to believe? Why are you so quick to reject that possibility out-of-hand?

The scenario s are different because you made them different to quote:

...the pretext of killing "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals", in a country with a history of associating those negative traits with black people.....

Yes, and this guy claims he was killing sex workers and prostitutes because they are an evil sexual temptation and he struggles with a "sex addiction", in a country with a rampant history of associating those negative traits with East Asian women. What's the difference?

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Where are you getting that figure? Actually, either of those figures?

Come to ny, we will take a walk. The 90% is an estimate, based on am article i posted earlier. The Asian places are ubiquitous all around the city and are storefronts. 40 years ago there would be Latin places in sone these neighborhoods, but those have disappeared, and tend to be in apartments in Spanish neighborhoods.

75% he shot 6 Asians and two white ls because he thought they were whores.

Yeah, sorry, that sounds like figures you made up to make you right and them wrong. We call that 'strawmanning'.

If the figures were the other way around (7 Asians for about 90%, 75% of defacto brothel workers Asian) you would say "that's only one w---- off exact racial parity, therefore race not a factor" but I'm not going to sink to your statistical level. I have never denied that race MIGHT be a factor, nor have I tried to prove or DISPROVE that it was.

Putting you on Ignore for now. Repeated used of the w---- word when you know I object to it. About 2 days.

[Kernen]

Why? The dead don't care.

Their families do, and people who knew those families also do.

Their families almost certainly aren't on NS.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Their families do, and people who knew those families also do.

Their families almost certainly aren't on NS.

That's what all internet dickwads say.

How about prostitutes? Any prostitutes here object to me calling prostitutes a bad name? No? Are you sure, you have to speak up now, or it will be your fault if you get offended! HELLO, prostitutes? Any prostitutes here?

Anonymity doesn't mean there isn't a real person there. Just try not to hurt ANYONE's feelings for no good reason, I say.

[Ethel mermania]

The scenario s are different because you made them different to quote:

...the pretext of killing "thugs, gangbangers, drug-dealers, and criminals", in a country with a history of associating those negative traits with black people.....

Yes, and this guy claims he was killing sex workers and prostitutes because they are an evil sexual temptation and he struggles with a "sex addiction", in a country with a rampant history of associating those negative traits with East Asian women. What's the difference?

Thats a stereotype of East Asian women, that they are all whores? I gotta tell you that is news to me. Even with the fetishisation of Asian women, its a huge leap to they are all whores.

That East Asian women work in East Asian places really shouldn't be a surprise. we could sue them for not hiring more black and Hispanics? Would a more diverse supply make you happier?

He killed them because those are the places he went. What about the the two white folk he killed for being whores. If he hated just Asians shouldn't they have lived?

[Ethel mermania]

Come to ny, we will take a walk. The 90% is an estimate, based on am article i posted earlier. The Asian places are ubiquitous all around the city and are storefronts. 40 years ago there would be Latin places in sone these neighborhoods, but those have disappeared, and tend to be in apartments in Spanish neighborhoods.

75% he shot 6 Asians and two white ls because he thought they were whores.

Yeah, sorry, that sounds like figures you made up to make you right and them wrong. We call that 'strawmanning'.

If the figures were the other way around (7 Asians for about 90%, 75% of defacto brothel workers Asian) you would say "that's only one w---- off exact racial parity, therefore race not a factor" but I'm not going to sink to your statistical level. I have never denied that race MIGHT be a factor, nor have I tried to prove or DISPROVE that it was.

Putting you on Ignore for now. Repeated used of the w---- word when you know I object to it. About 2 days.

Ok, thanks for the heads up.

[Purgatio]

Yes, and this guy claims he was killing sex workers and prostitutes because they are an evil sexual temptation and he struggles with a "sex addiction", in a country with a rampant history of associating those negative traits with East Asian women. What's the difference?

Thats a stereotype of East Asian women, that they are all whores? I gotta tell you that is news to me. Even with the fetishisation of Asian women, its a huge leap to they are all whores.

That East Asian women work in East Asian places really shouldn't be a surprise. we could sue them for not hiring more black and Hispanics? Would a more diverse supply make you happier?

He killed them because those are the places he went. What about the the two white folk he killed for being whores. If he hated just Asians shouldn't they have lived?

Okay this is just getting ridiculous now. Like this is pretty obvious strawmanning. Saying "Race X is often stereotypically associated with Y" is clearly not the same thing as "People Believe That Every Single Person in Race X is Y No Exceptions At All". Hispanics are often stereotyped as illegal immigrants in the US. Does that mean the average person in the US believes every single Hispanic is an illegal immigrant, no exceptions at all? Does that also mean there can't be any negative racial stereotypes between Hispanics and immigration law. Black people are often stereotyped as criminals in the US. Does that mean the average person in the US believes literally every single black person is a criminal or felon, zero exceptions? If a person believes that black people are more likely to be criminals than other races, but admits that some black people aren't criminals, are they suddenly not a racist anymore?

When you fetishise an entire race of women as sexually-available, submissive objects, which you seem to somewhat accept is true for East Asians in the US, even though you really are so so reluctant to admit it (which is very odd), it really isn't a stretch to accept that there'll be a similar racist association between East Asian women and sex work/prostitution. Does that mean the average person in the US thinks every single East Asian woman in the US is a prostitute, every single one of them? No, obviously not. But thats not how racist generalisations and implicit associations work. This kind of hyperbole seems intended only to create an overexaggerated version of racism, as if debunking that overexaggerated picture of racism somehow proves that more nuanced, less-extreme versions of racism can't also exist.

Same for your fallacious argument that "oh he killed two white people too", as if you can't simultaneously believe that East Asian women are more likely to be prostitutes than women of other races, and ALSO believe that there are non-East Asian prostitutes out there. Like seriously I can't even believe I have to say this. Is it possible to believe that black people are more likely to be criminals than other races, and ALSO believe that there are non-black people who commit crimes? Is it possible to believe Hispanics are more likely to be illegal immigrants than other races, and ALSO believe that there are non-Hispanic illegal immigrants? Is the point clear enough? Hopefully.

As for your really random and totally uncalled for "would you prefer if these places hired blacks and Hispanics" and "would a more diverse supply make you happier", given I've said nothing even close to that in the arguments I've made thus far this seems like another facetious attempt to make my argument seem more hyperbolic and less nuanced than it actually is.

Also, its already been pointed out by someone else, but I still have no clue why you keep insisting on referring to these people as "whores" when its quite clearly a derogatory slur. Like, its genuinely strange to me. The words "prostitute" and "sex worker" exist and they aren't slurs. Idk why you'd rather use a slur over two non-slurs that convey the exact same meaning. Just thought that should be noted too.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Also, its already been pointed out by someone else, but I still have no clue why you keep insisting on referring to these people as "whores" when its quite clearly a derogatory slur. Like, its genuinely strange to me. The words "prostitute" and "sex worker" exist and they aren't slurs. Idk why you'd rather use a slur over two non-slurs that convey the exact same meaning. Just thought that should be noted too.

I guess it's accepted slang in New York, and probably isn't that offensive there even directly to a prostitute. Part of the old culture that you need a thick skin to be a New Yorker.

I wouldn't even care in most threads. When the subject is the worst spree killing in the US in over a year, and the victims were prostitutes, it's hard to escape the imputation that their lives were worth less than the average woman's.

[Ethel mermania]

Thats a stereotype of East Asian women, that they are all whores? I gotta tell you that is news to me. Even with the fetishisation of Asian women, its a huge leap to they are all whores.

That East Asian women work in East Asian places really shouldn't be a surprise. we could sue them for not hiring more black and Hispanics? Would a more diverse supply make you happier?

He killed them because those are the places he went. What about the the two white folk he killed for being whores. If he hated just Asians shouldn't they have lived?

Okay this is just getting ridiculous now. Like this is pretty obvious strawmanning. Saying "Race X is often stereotypically associated with Y" is clearly not the same thing as "People Believe That Every Single Person in Race X is Y No Exceptions At All". Hispanics are often stereotyped as illegal immigrants in the US. Does that mean the average person in the US believes every single Hispanic is an illegal immigrant, no exceptions at all? Does that also mean there can't be any negative racial stereotypes between Hispanics and immigration law. Black people are often stereotyped as criminals in the US. Does that mean the average person in the US believes literally every single black person is a criminal or felon, zero exceptions? If a person believes that black people are more likely to be criminals than other races, but admits that some black people aren't criminals, are they suddenly not a racist anymore?

When you fetishise an entire race of women as sexually-available, submissive objects, which you seem to somewhat accept is true for East Asians in the US, even though you really are so so reluctant to admit it (which is very odd), it really isn't a stretch to accept that there'll be a similar racist association between East Asian women and sex work/prostitution. Does that mean the average person in the US thinks every single East Asian woman in the US is a prostitute, every single one of them? No, obviously not. But thats not how racist generalisations and implicit associations work. This kind of hyperbole seems intended only to create an overexaggerated version of racism, as if debunking that overexaggerated picture of racism somehow proves that more nuanced, less-extreme versions of racism can't also exist.

Same for your fallacious argument that "oh he killed two white people too", as if you can't simultaneously believe that East Asian women are more likely to be prostitutes than women of other races, and ALSO believe that there are non-East Asian prostitutes out there. Like seriously I can't even believe I have to say this. Is it possible to believe that black people are more likely to be criminals than other races, and ALSO believe that there are non-black people who commit crimes? Is it possible to believe Hispanics are more likely to be illegal immigrants than other races, and ALSO believe that there are non-Hispanic illegal immigrants? Is the point clear enough? Hopefully.

As for your really random and totally uncalled for "would you prefer if these places hired blacks and Hispanics" and "would a more diverse supply make you happier", given I've said nothing even close to that in the arguments I've made thus far this seems like another facetious attempt to make my argument seem more hyperbolic and less nuanced than it actually is.

Also, its already been pointed out by someone else, but I still have no clue why you keep insisting on referring to these people as "whores" when its quite clearly a derogatory slur. Like, its genuinely strange to me. The words "prostitute" and "sex worker" exist and they aren't slurs. Idk why you'd rather use a slur over two non-slurs that convey the exact same meaning. Just thought that should be noted too.

...Same for your fallacious argument that "oh he killed two white people too", as if you can't simultaneously believe that East Asian women are more likely to be prostitutes than women of other races...

I dont believe East Asian women are more likely to be prostitutes than others, i think your own biased about people lead you to jump to that conclusion.

I know that in Asian whore houses thr majority of thr workers are Asian. I also know that storefront whorehouses in the United States today are in the majority asian.

So if this event happened in nyc 40 years ago, when there were Latin storefronts whorehouses, I believe the same body count would have a different ethnic composition. So my comment about diversifying the workforce makes sense to me. Remember those white people were killed for being whores, which is what makes it to me non racial.

The term whore is what the shooter thought. He was slaying the servants of the whore of Babylon to protect his already tarnished purity. We need to accurately reflect his state of mind to understand the context of the act.

[Immortan Khan]

Was he? I just kind of glanced at the link in the OP and hadn't seen that.

A witness claims to have heard that but afaik the shooter has explicitly told police it was not racially motivated.

Yes but it's entirely possible he's lying about that in order to more effectively use a potential temporary insanity argument which would never fly if he admitted it was, at least in part, racially motivated.

[Luminesa]

Their families do, and people who knew those families also do.

Their families almost certainly aren't on NS.

I mean no, but the comments some people make on NS don’t quite exist in a vacuum either. People make those comments elsewhere and bring them here. So those people should stop doing that and hurting those families. NS might be small, but that doesn’t mean that it is necessarily a unique part of the internet.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

A witness claims to have heard that but afaik the shooter has explicitly told police it was not racially motivated.

Yes but it's entirely possible he's lying about that in order to more effectively use a potential temporary insanity argument which would never fly if he admitted it was, at least in part, racially motivated.

Also possible that the police stopped issuing updates on what he said, pending a mental health assessment.

Or that police repeated just enough to establish that he did have a motive, but saw the potential of anything about race to cause further trouble. If he said something like "I did it to preserve the White race" and that was made public, Korean Americans and their sympathisers might try and pick off local Nazis, which from the cop perspective would be Bad.

[Luminesa]

One verse from Leviticus doesn’t define the whole view of prostitutes in the Bible.

I don't think you want me to quote them all. Anyway, I see marrying a slave as actually worse than prostitution

The institution is seen as wrong (as the Bible sees all sex outside of marriage), but a prostitute (Rahab) is linked to Jesus through the Genealogy of Matthew. In that way, salvation history does not exclude women who have been involved in sex work. Therefore what the Bible says and what this man’s church said are not the same thing.

If I understand Southern Baptists alright, individual pastors can preach pretty much anything, there isn't a promulgator of doctrine. In any case, it is on the subject of sex that the Bible most sets limits which are unreasonable and contradictory by modern standards. The strength of ownership that marriage provides a man, is essentially slavery. What strength of ownership it provides to a woman is rather irrelevant, given that the law of that time would not enforce it.

In this case, despite my joke above, the man might have misunderstood "taking a slave as a wife" being OK, and thought with or without reason that the sex workers were slaves, and justified to himself spending time with them as being a necessary stage of courtship.

If ^this had been going on for a while, a crisis could be precipitated by something as minor as a manager telling him: "you can stay a customer but we need you to stop offering marriage to the girls. Some of them, not telling you which, are married already. You can't marry any of the girls, got it?"

Christians don’t follow Leviticus anyway and understand that the Old Law was a stepping stone toward the crux of salvation, in which there would be NO slavery and NO people considered inferior. ANYWAY.

For the bolded bit, the marriage system actually does mildly favor women, especially when it comes to custody of children. More on topic, however, this crisis could have been averted if this man had gotten off the streets and into some sort of rehab for sex addiction (and for violent feelings toward women, especially seemingly toward Asian women).

[Purgatio]

I dont believe East Asian women are more likely to be prostitutes than others, i think your own biased about people lead you to jump to that conclusion.

I know that in Asian whore houses thr majority of thr workers are Asian. I also know that storefront whorehouses in the United States today are in the majority asian.

So if this event happened in nyc 40 years ago, when there were Latin storefronts whorehouses, I believe the same body count would have a different ethnic composition. So my comment about diversifying the workforce makes sense to me. Remember those white people were killed for being whores, which is what makes it to me non racial.

The term whore is what the shooter thought. He was slaying the servants of the whore of Babylon to protect his already tarnished purity. We need to accurately reflect his state of mind to understand the context of the act.

Huh? Like, why? If we were discussing the killing of Matthew Shepard or the Orlando shooting would you also refer to gay people as "faggots" because 'oh we need to accurately reflect the state of mind of the homophobic killers'? If we were discussing the Charleston church shooting should we start throwing around the N-word to 'get into the mind of Dylann Roof'? This seriously makes no sense to me. I'm perfectly capable of understanding that Long hated sex workers and prostitutes and viewed them through a dehumanising lens without using the slur "whore" in my own conversations and my own sentences. Why can't you?

Also, again, the fact that 2 white people were killed for being suspected prostitutes in the mind of Long doesn't erase the racial element of the shooting. It just means the shooter, like most racists, doesn't believe that literally every single East Asian woman is a prostitute, and literally every single prostitute is East Asian. Thats a hyperbolic, over-exaggerated version of racism that doesn't exist except in very rare cases. Doesn't mean that subconscious biases can't exist. Doesn't mean that implicit racist associations can't exist. If a shooter associates black people with criminality, and goes out to shoot a bunch of people whom he believes are criminals, the overwhelming majority of whom are black, its fair to point out that the shooting was racially-motivated on account of the shooter's association of blackness with criminality, even if there were some white victims whom that shooter believed were criminals as well. I seriously don't get this either-or dichotomy where either you literally believe every single person in a group is of a particular race, 100%, or you hold zero negative racial associations between a race and that characteristic, and like, nothing at all in between those two extremes.

[Ethel mermania]

I dont believe East Asian women are more likely to be prostitutes than others, i think your own biased about people lead you to jump to that conclusion.

I know that in Asian whore houses thr majority of thr workers are Asian. I also know that storefront whorehouses in the United States today are in the majority asian.

So if this event happened in nyc 40 years ago, when there were Latin storefronts whorehouses, I believe the same body count would have a different ethnic composition. So my comment about diversifying the workforce makes sense to me. Remember those white people were killed for being whores, which is what makes it to me non racial.

The term whore is what the shooter thought. He was slaying the servants of the whore of Babylon to protect his already tarnished purity. We need to accurately reflect his state of mind to understand the context of the act.

Huh? Like, why? If we were discussing the killing of Matthew Shepard or the Orlando shooting would you also refer to gay people as "faggots" because 'oh we need to accurately reflect the state of mind of the homophobic killers'? If we were discussing the Charleston church shooting should we start throwing around the N-word to 'get into the mind of Dylann Roof'? This seriously makes no sense to me. I'm perfectly capable of understanding that Long hated sex workers and prostitutes and viewed them through a dehumanising lens without using the slur "whore" in my own conversations and my own sentences. Why can't you?

Also, again, the fact that 2 white people were killed for being suspected prostitutes in the mind of Long doesn't erase the racial element of the shooting. It just means the shooter, like most racists, doesn't believe that literally every single East Asian woman is a prostitute, and literally every single prostitute is East Asian. Thats a hyperbolic, over-exaggerated version of racism that doesn't exist except in very rare cases. Doesn't mean that subconscious biases can't exist. Doesn't mean that implicit racist associations can't exist. If a shooter associates black people with criminality, and goes out to shoot a bunch of people whom he believes are criminals, the overwhelming majority of whom are black, its fair to point out that the shooting was racially-motivated on account of the shooter's association of blackness with criminality, even if there were some white victims whom that shooter believed were criminals as well. I seriously don't get this either-or dichotomy where either you literally believe every single person in a group is of a particular race, 100%, or you hold zero negative racial associations between a race and that characteristic, and like, nothing at all in between those two extremes.

You just want to see racism where it doesn't exist and write long paragraphs to justify it, enjoy.

[Purgatio]

Huh? Like, why? If we were discussing the killing of Matthew Shepard or the Orlando shooting would you also refer to gay people as "faggots" because 'oh we need to accurately reflect the state of mind of the homophobic killers'? If we were discussing the Charleston church shooting should we start throwing around the N-word to 'get into the mind of Dylann Roof'? This seriously makes no sense to me. I'm perfectly capable of understanding that Long hated sex workers and prostitutes and viewed them through a dehumanising lens without using the slur "whore" in my own conversations and my own sentences. Why can't you?

Also, again, the fact that 2 white people were killed for being suspected prostitutes in the mind of Long doesn't erase the racial element of the shooting. It just means the shooter, like most racists, doesn't believe that literally every single East Asian woman is a prostitute, and literally every single prostitute is East Asian. Thats a hyperbolic, over-exaggerated version of racism that doesn't exist except in very rare cases. Doesn't mean that subconscious biases can't exist. Doesn't mean that implicit racist associations can't exist. If a shooter associates black people with criminality, and goes out to shoot a bunch of people whom he believes are criminals, the overwhelming majority of whom are black, its fair to point out that the shooting was racially-motivated on account of the shooter's association of blackness with criminality, even if there were some white victims whom that shooter believed were criminals as well. I seriously don't get this either-or dichotomy where either you literally believe every single person in a group is of a particular race, 100%, or you hold zero negative racial associations between a race and that characteristic, and like, nothing at all in between those two extremes.

You just want to see racism where it doesn't exist and write long paragraphs to justify it, enjoy.

........okay, sure. Suit yourself.

I mean, should I even waste my breath pointing out that racism against East Asian women exists? That a lot of that racism takes the form of sexual objectification, fetishisation, viewing them as sexually submissive and servile objects? And how that has a very very very obvious connection to this shooter's motivations for killing these women, 6 of whom were East Asian? Its not like I'm making any of that up. You don't even have to take my word for it, you know. Like, you absolutely can (and 100% should) google this shit and learn more about the prevalent stereotypes against East Asian women in the US (here's a start if you don't know where to begin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotypes_of_East_Asians_in_the_United_States#Women).

Its a thing, you know. It does "exist". It still exists even if you refuse to believe it or you choose to be actively, wilfully blind to it for whatever reason that pleases you. Idk how much clearer I can get. Objective reality continues to exist even though you keep asserting that it "doesn't exist"?