Blacks abuse their children? Blame white people
Apr 30th, 2011 by Unamused
is black child abuse a problem bordering on epidemic [in the Americas]? I’m new to this part of the world so I don’t know. In my native New Zealand there are huge problems with Maori (the indigenous group) child abuse. Stories like this are reported just all the fucking time so I want to figure out if it’s an underclass thing or a Maori thing.
See the appendix for more on Maori crime.
Black child abuse
Well, it turns out black people are more likely to abuse their children than white people. And guess what, it’s not because white people working for Child Protective Services just hate all dark-skinned people so much, they don’t care if they beat and molest their kids! Because that was everyone’s first guess. From the Root:
Rates of reported child abuse are disproportionately high for black children, a fact that has long been linked to suspected racial bias by a largely white child-protection workforce. But a recently released study by Washington University researchers debunks that allegation, citing poverty as the main reason black children are twice as likely as white children to suffer abuse.
Fuck this country. Seriously. Black people beat the shit out of their children twice as much as white people do theirs, and what’s the default explanation? The go-to theory? White people are just a bunch of racists. They like it when blacks beat their kids. It should be unbelievable. Instead, it’s canonical.
Published in the March issue of the journal Pediatrics, the study, “Racial Bias in Child Protection? A Comparison of Competing Explanations Using National Data,” does note the importance of policing potential racial bias among teachers, doctors, nurses, law-enforcement officials, child-protective-services workers and other primary reporters of abuse.
Actually, Washington University researchers, you just proved it isn’t important to police “potential [meaning fake, imaginary, non-existent] racial bias among [evil, disgusting, white] teachers, doctors, nurses, law-enforcement officials, child-protective-services workers and other primary reporters of abuse.” See: “The problem is not that (child protective services) workers are racist” (lead author Brett Drake).
What’s important is to police black people abusing their children. Oh, wait. That would be racial profiling.
The rate of abuse among Latinos children was proportionately higher than that of whites but lower than that of blacks. Researchers attribute that difference to the “Hispanic paradox,” or what are believed to be that community’s comparatively stricter cultural mores against child abuse.
White > Hispanic > black. Where have we seen that order before? (Answer: Pretty much everywhere — IQ scores and crime rates being two obvious examples.) I wonder where East Asians place…
Don’t worry, I’m sure we can find some way to blame white racism for something.
Though unfamiliar with the study, Zena Oglesby, founder and executive director of the Los Angeles-based Institute for Black Parenting, told The Root that a major, lingering concern is the question of how race factors into court settlements of abuse cases. … “I’ve watched hundreds of white families show up with their relatives, and those relatives are given custody of abused children without their home ever being screened for safety or suitability,” he continued. “Too often, that [granting of temporary custody to relatives] never happens with black families who end up in court.”
Hurray! We set out to find white racism to explain away all of black people’s problems, and armed only with anecdotes and confirmation bias, we succeeded!
More black child abuse
We turn to another article on the same study at the Defenders Online (run by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund). A special Unamusement Park “fuck you” goes out to Sondra Jackson, Executive Director of the Washington, D.C.-based Black Administrators in Child Welfare, who said that
this study is yet another attempt to shift the discussion away from race and toward other causes like poverty. “People can use research to disprove stuff they don’t want to deal with,” she said.
No, you moron, people use research to disprove your paranoid fantasies about white racism, making Black Administrators in Child Welfare unnecessary — not to mention your fanatical race loyalty that would embarrass the average Klansman.
Richard Wexler, Executive Director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform (NCCPR) offered critical comments about this and other studies, saying they are rife with fatal flaws in that they fail to take into account that child welfare decisions are affected by both class and racial biases, and they reinforce each other.
He goes on to say that black people are poor, and that makes them abuse their children, contradicting exactly nothing about the study.
Wexler asked: “Why do these distinguished researchers believe that the bias that still is part of every facet of American life somehow disappears at the child welfare agency door, or the office of a doctor or some other mandated reporter of child abuse?”
Because, racial paranoia notwithstanding, there is no such bias.
Stacey Patton is the author of the Defenders Online article and Senior Editor of the same NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Working away for the Advancement of Colored People, and only Colored People — clearly the right person to ask if you want an unbiased take on race issues. She writes:
The problem of racism is still deeply ingrained and systemic in all of our institutions.
Citation needed. Hey, where was all that deeply ingrained and systemic institutional racism when America was electing a race-obsessed half-black socialist? For that matter, where was it when he was applying to Harvard Law School? Probably out burning crosses or something.
Thus, the child welfare system does not exist in a vacuum, unaffected by the past and present treatment of black people. Similar racial disparities can be found in health, employment, education and criminal justice.
That’s because black people are less intelligent and more criminal than white people. Racial disparities: EXPLAINED.
As long as we continually try to fix people [You mean black people, right? Because white people don’t seem to need “fixing.”] rather than the institutional racism that burdens us all, the problems will persist and children will continue to be become hapless victims of the poverty of life and scores more will die.
Oh my gosh, people are dying from “institutional” (i.e., invisible) racism? Meanwhile, in the real world, a black man murders eight white people — clearly, white racism is to blame for that too.
White America: your attention, please
That is what racial discrimination in America really looks like. You don’t need to unearth it in child abuse statistics, or imprisonment rates, or achievement gaps. It’s out there in the open for everyone to see. A black man murders innocent white people, and everyone agrees: they were asking for it, those racists.
Anti-black discrimination is insignificant, invisible, or as liberals like to say, “institutional,” but blacks won’t stop crying about it. Anti-white discrimination, on the other hand, is ubiquitous, blatant, shameless; indulged by the media, enforced by the courts, celebrated by mainstream blacks and whites alike; so commonplace you hardly notice it, whether it’s a stereotype or a racial slur or a random beating or a mass murder; but you’re expected to act like it’s a logical impossibility, as if a racist black might as well be a square circle.
Maybe you should start paying more attention. After all, this is your country; your culture; your civilization.
For the moment.
Appendix: Maori crime
Maori make up just 14 percent of the population of New Zealand, but are responsible for over 65 percent of all crime (One News). Compare this to the similarly outrageous crime rates of black Americans, who make up just 13-14 percent of the population of the USA.
A New Zealand researcher claims there is an over-representation of the “warrior” gene, which has been linked to aggressive behaviour, in Maori men.
Dr Rod Lea said the monoamine oxidase gene, carried by a large number of Maori, could be key to addressing health issues.
The genetic epidemiologist at the Institute of Environmental Science and Research in Wellington said the gene has been linked to aggressive behaviour as well as addictions to things such as tobacco.
… Australian Associated Press quoted him as saying: “It is controversial because it has implications suggesting links with criminality among Maori people. I think there is a link, it definitely predisposes people to be more likely to be criminals and engage in that type of behaviour as they grow older.
“There are lots of lifestyle, upbringing-related exposures that could be relevant here so, obviously, the gene won’t automatically make you a criminal. … We have to be clear that behavioural traits such as susceptibility to addiction, aggressive behaviour, risk taking, all those sort of things are extremely complex and they are due to numerous factors including non-genetic environmental factors like upbringing and other lifestyle factors. So there is an influence there, but it’s probably a minor one in the scheme of things.”
Very politic of him. Now let’s hear from the Maori. Why that should be necessary to understand the genetics of aggression is a bit of a mystery, but whatever.
Maori MP Hone Harawira said he had been hearing similar things for decades.
“I remember 30 or 40 years ago when I was a kid people said Maori had a natural inclination to play the guitar, that Maori had a natural inclination to play rugby, Maori were good on bulldozers etc…,” he said. “I’ve stopped listening to all that sort of carry on.”
In other words: science is racist and mean and I’m not listening to it, lalalalala… Hey, Hone Harawira: there’s a difference between the kids at school telling you Maori are good at rugby, versus a genetic epidemiologist identifying a gene associated with both the Maori and aggressive behavior. Idiot.
Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia dismissed the research as incredible.
She told The Press newspaper she had heard of Maori having a genetic pre-disposition towards alcoholism, but it was a big leap to include violent tendencies in that.
“I realise that violence is an issue to us, but there are very common factors as well with violence which are not really related to race,” she said.
Incredible! I’ll say. Again, she knows nothing about genetics or violent behavior, but she’s Maori, so we should all listen respectfully to her ignorant opinion.
Meanwhile, the police cannot acknowledge the realities of Maori crime (that would be racist), so their hands are tied. From One News:
“We’ve actually got some structure around where we can now pull Maori and the police together and how we can effectively work together,” [Inspector Wally Haumaha] says.
… Police now believe the key to changing that statistic could lie in a new plan allowing increased visitation rights with family members and then involving the wider Maori community in trying to turn offenders around.
This is beyond satire. Maori keep raping and murdering people, and the solution is (obviously) to give them more visitation rights. I absolutely agree, assuming that by “visitation rights with family members” they mean chemical castration and death sentences, respectively.
If 14 percent of the population is committing 65 percent of the crime, I’d say the “wider Maori community” is already involved, Inspector.
Maori respondents believed unanimously that the police viewed Maori as essentially criminals…
Gee, I wonder why.
Whether the new strategy will bring a drop in the crime rate should become clear in a year’s time when officers review its success.
So how’d that work out? One year later (New Zealand Press Association):
[t]he high proportion of offending by Maori is rated “a significant concern” by the Ministry of Justice. It noted in its annual report today that though Maori form just 14.5 per cent of New Zealand’s population, half the prison population and 45 per cent of offenders serving community-based sentences identify themselves as Maori.
I guess they didn’t increase Maori visitation rights enough.