Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

https://blackmeninamerica.com/updated-how-do-black-people-spend-their-money-3/




Market research is the elephant in the room to every single "You can not define us" argument.

I don't get the point of this thread. At all.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I don't get the point of this thread. At all.


My point is demographic research is literally profiling people by race, sex, gender, and age.


The verry thing social activist get angry about in casual contexts.

Yet nobody seems to have noticed this fact, or care. I mean, they are literally saying "Those people act like.."

Originally posted by -Pr-
I don't get the point of this thread. At all. Racism

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Racism

Care to elaborate further?

Originally posted by cdtm
My point is demographic research is literally profiling people by race, sex, gender, and age.


The verry thing social activist get angry about in casual contexts.

Yet nobody seems to have noticed this fact, or care. I mean, they are literally saying "Those people act like.."

Yes, that's what demographics do, last I checked. Break people up in to distinguishable groups.

So your post is what, a condemnation of demographics as a whole? Or just people who use them to justify bad things?

Originally posted by -Pr-
Yes, that's what demographics do, last I checked. Break people up in to distinguishable groups.

So your post is what, a condemnation of demographics as a whole? Or just people who use them to justify bad things?

Neither. He's pretending to be upset about "social activists" not being upset about it which must automatically make them hypocrites who don't care about the actual racism that he's trying hard to direct away from.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Neither. He's pretending to be upset about "social activists" not being upset about it which must automatically make them hypocrites who don't care about the actual racism that he's trying hard to direct away from. We have a winner

Lol, black people

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Neither. He's pretending to be upset about "social activists" not being upset about it which must automatically make them hypocrites who don't care about the actual racism that he's trying hard to direct away from.

Bingo

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Neither. He's pretending to be upset about "social activists" not being upset about it which must automatically make them hypocrites who don't care about the actual racism that he's trying hard to direct away from. Originally posted by Newjak
We have a winner Originally posted by Robtard
Bingo Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Racism

Tell me what you really think, guys.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Yes, that's what demographics do, last I checked. Break people up in to distinguishable groups.

So your post is what, a condemnation of demographics as a whole? Or just people who use them to justify bad things?

More of an observation at this point.

But, well, think about it. Say that women like babies, and you'll get your head lopped off.


Yet market studies could get away with saying "70 percent of women like babies."



Ok, so shouldn't feminists be shutting down market studies that say "women like babies"? Why don't they?


Why is it wrong for a police office to profile a hit and run driver as "Muslim" when the driver was a Muslim (Activists did demonstrate against this) yet it's perfectly fine to profile people into groups for market reasons?


My thought on the subject are, let's say, "evolving" as I only just noticed this trend, but at the least it suggest a big blind spot in how social politics and business operates. They are not held to the same standards, at all.

Originally posted by cdtm
Tell me what you really think, guys.

I didn't tell you what I think. I told you what you think.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not sure if he's an actual racist. He is a tryhard though.

I also suspect he can actually see the difference between a company doing market research to sell products and police pulling over a guy driving just because he's a Black. Even though he's doing his best to conflate the two.

The difference in harm? Certainly?


Can you see the difference in harm of Nazi's literally killing Jews, and someone denying the Holocaust happened?


Yet you'd be angry, right?


You'd also be offended if someone pointed out Jews control the media, in spite of actual data that they are over represented as a group in media companies.

Yet market research, which is literally designed to profile people in ways that would be unacceptable in casual conversation, you have no problem with.


It is what it is though, feel free to tell me what I'm thinking or really saying.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not sure if he's an actual racist.

he's just pretending to be racist for cool-guy tokens, just like all the other racists.

do real racists exist, or are they all just "pretending"?

Originally posted by cdtm
The difference in harm? Certainly?


Can you see the difference in harm of Nazi's literally killing Jews, and someone denying the Holocaust happened?


Yet you'd be angry, right?


You'd also be offended if someone pointed out Jews control the media, in spite of actual data that they are over represented as a group in media companies.

Yet market research, which is literally designed to profile people in ways that would be unacceptable in casual conversation, you have no problem with.


It is what it is though, feel free to tell me what I'm thinking or really saying.

You've now equated market research to sell products with holocaust deniers, who are racist, in your attempts to do your thing here.

Shit, maybe you are an actual racist. Egg on my face.

Saying X is more/less likely to have/do Y is not the same as saying they are more/less likely to have/do Y because they are X.

Not difficult, is it?

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
he's just pretending to be racist for cool-guy tokens, just like all the other racists.

do real racists exist, or are they all just "pretending"?

Yeah, egg on my face.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Saying X is more/less likely to have/do Y is not the same as saying they are more/less likely to have/do Y because they are X.

Not difficult, is it?

And you are old, lol.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced cdtm lives in an alternate reality. How did he go through life without realizing people criticize market research all the time? Or maybe he doesn't know what monolith means?

Your very own article reveals black people aren't a monolith.

You have to remember, market research doesn't have to accurately gauge an entire group. They only need to know they have enough of a potential audience to make money. This usually amounts to them targeting a certain sub-group within a group.

It doesn't actually show how every individual will act.

Originally posted by StyleTime
I'm becoming increasingly convinced cdtm lives in an alternate reality. How did he go through life without realizing people criticize market research all the time? Or maybe he doesn't know what monolith means?

Your very own article reveals black people aren't a monolith.

You have to remember, market research doesn't have to accurately gauge an entire group. They only need to know they have enough of a potential audience to make money. This usually amounts to them targeting a certain sub-group within a group.

It doesn't actually show how every individual will act.


I'm afraid you're the one living in an alternative reality, my friend.



So your argument is that one is not racist for noting trends of an ethnic group, without condemning or broad brushing the entire group?


I present to you Thomas Lopez-Pierre. Disgraced New York City mayoral prospect. His crime was accusing greedy Jewish landlords of displacing hispanic and black tenants.


He was attacked by the Left and Right both as a raving anti-semite. The fact the majority of landlords in the area he represents happen to be Jewish, and very greedy, and displacing minorities, does not absolve him in the least.


But sure, keep pretending its possible to criticise members of a protected group in ANY WAY without being branded a bigot.

Originally posted by cdtm
I'm afraid you're the one living in an alternative reality, my friend.

So your argument is that one is not racist for noting trends of an ethnic group, without condemning or broad brushing the entire group?
No, my argument is that black people aren't a monolith. Very few large groups actually are.
Originally posted by cdtm

I present to you Thomas Lopez-Pierre. Disgraced New York City mayoral prospect. His crime was accusing greedy Jewish landlords of displacing hispanic and black tenants.

He was attacked by the Left and Right both as a raving anti-semite. The fact the majority of landlords in the area he represents happen to be Jewish, and very greedy, and displacing minorities, does not absolve him in the least.

But sure, keep pretending its possible to criticise members of a protected group in ANY WAY without being branded a bigot.
Ah yes, Thomas Lopez-Pierre...the guy who admitted to lying about a fraudulent fundraising campaign that generated thousands of dollars for him. He also owes money for his various campaign violations, including using campaign funds for personal purposes other malfeasances. He has a history of anti-semitic rhetoric too, and it wasn't just the Jewish landlords comment that did him in.

In other threads, you talk big about being distrustful of politicians, yet you valorize outright crooks like Thomas Lopez-Pierre when they get called out for bigoted comments. And hey, look, he's a minority and it's okay to criticize him for being the con-artist he is. This should be your wet dream.

You can troll better than this. I believe in you.

Originally posted by Robtard
Bingo

Nah.

Originally posted by Blakemore
And you are old, lol.


You do realize that one day you're gonna be old as well, right?

That is of course assuming you don't kill yourself young with all that damn alcohol you drink.

Originally posted by cdtm
I'm afraid you're the one living in an alternative reality, my friend.



So your argument is that one is not racist for noting trends of an ethnic group, without condemning or broad brushing the entire group?


I present to you Thomas Lopez-Pierre. Disgraced New York City mayoral prospect. His crime was accusing greedy Jewish landlords of displacing hispanic and black tenants.


He was attacked by the Left and Right both as a raving anti-semite. The fact the majority of landlords in the area he represents happen to be Jewish, and very greedy, and displacing minorities, does not absolve him in the least.


But sure, keep pretending its possible to criticise members of a protected group in ANY WAY without being branded a bigot.


"Bingo."

It's so weird how Star and cdtm will rally around a Democrat when he's proven to be completely corrupt, like Thomas Lopez-Pierre.

Chill out, you leftists.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Neither. He's pretending to be upset about "social activists" not being upset about it which must automatically make them hypocrites who don't care about the actual racism that he's trying hard to direct away from.

Originally posted by Newjak
We have a winner

Possibly.

Originally posted by cdtm
More of an observation at this point.

But, well, think about it. Say that women like babies, and you'll get your head lopped off.


Yet market studies could get away with saying "70 percent of women like babies."



Ok, so shouldn't feminists be shutting down market studies that say "women like babies"? Why don't they?


Why is it wrong for a police office to profile a hit and run driver as "Muslim" when the driver was a Muslim (Activists did demonstrate against this) yet it's perfectly fine to profile people into groups for market reasons?


My thought on the subject are, let's say, "evolving" as I only just noticed this trend, but at the least it suggest a big blind spot in how social politics and business operates. They are not held to the same standards, at all.

Your point assumes that most women are the kind of "feminists" you're talking about, when they're not.

By and large, women do like babies. Because most of them do. We just can't punish or criticise the ones that don't, as more and more women are choosing careers or simply being child-free.

Profiling a driver by his religion is not the same as saying women like babies. It's a false equivalency and honestly, it's a weird comparison to make.

We don't hold them to the same standards because they're not the same.

Originally posted by StyleTime
It's so weird how Star and cdtm will rally around a Democrat when he's proven to be completely corrupt, like Thomas Lopez-Pierre.

Chill out, you leftists.

Bingo.

Originally posted by StyleTime
It's so weird how Star and cdtm will rally around a Democrat when he's proven to be completely corrupt, like Thomas Lopez-Pierre.

Chill out, you leftists.


Poisoning the well, Styletime? That's beneath you, you debate fine without resorting to logical fallaciess.



What I said is true, and you know it. Or give me an example of someone criticizing Jewish or Black communities, that wasn't called a racist or anti-Semite.


Even legitimate criticism of Israel's Zionist policies get condemned as ant-semitism.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Possibly.



Your point assumes that most women are the kind of "feminists" you're talking about, when they're not.

By and large, women do like babies. Because most of them do. We just can't punish or criticise the ones that don't, as more and more women are choosing careers or simply being child-free.

Profiling a driver by his religion is not the same as saying women like babies. It's a false equivalency and honestly, it's a weird comparison to make.

We don't hold them to the same standards because they're not the same.


Went back to the story (From a book called "Activist Wisdom", a sort of guide book for radical activists), it was actually "Arabs".


In other words, they were mentioning ethnicity, which I think is relevant when looking for s hit and run driver.

Originally posted by cdtm
Poisoning the well, Styletime? That's beneath you, you debate fine without resorting to logical fallaciess.

What I said is true, and you know it. Or give me an example of someone criticizing Jewish or Black communities, that wasn't called a racist or anti-Semite.

Even legitimate criticism of Israel's Zionist policies get condemned as ant-semitism.
I didn't poison the well. I explained why your statement was false, then pointed out it was a strange example to use for someone who claims to be so adamantly against crooked politicians. Lopez-Pierre is an actual con artist.

Additionally, it's fairly well known you have zero interest in a good faith discussion on just about anything. You poisoned your own well, I'm afraid, and became generally known as a troll.

This 2nd part is too vague. What do you mean, specifically, by "criticizing Jewish or Black communities"? Surely, you understand how that sounds like "Why can't I say something racist damnit!" It's absolutely fine to criticize the Israeli government for certain policies. That's different, however, from going on a racist tirade about how bad "The Jews" are.

It's difficult to talk about this without specifics though. What is it you so desperately want to say about Jewish and Black people?