First off, the Geena Davis Institute is a reputable and well respected research organization, which commissions it's studies from USC (it's typically done by Ph.Ds from that well respected university). I did link that to you at the time of our discussion in response to your assertion that you'd respect the findings if they came from university research. It's convenient that you forgot that. They also frequently partner with UNICEF (another fly-by-night organization 😸).
Every source I quote from or link to is from reputable sources, and the fact that you aren't able to rebut any of them specifically means you have to resort to the kind of attack that you tried above about the Geena Davis Institute.
When you pointed out that race is not related to mass shootings I agreed with you (did you conveniently forget that also?), because I actually investigate my assertions before making them. The fact that someone else does not has nothing to do with me, and you trying to lump us together is a sign of poor debate and a weak position.
Then there's this as well, which tends to indicate that yes, you do believe that sources, and data, and facts are an important part of political discourse.
From that same comment by you on a story I wrote: "When we stick to the facts as they are, concrete and indisputable we stand some chance of maintaining civil discourse."
I agree that just having a link to something doesn't make it true, but when the prevailing consensus from a wide variety of sources is the same (as with the data I presented on "driving while black") then that ought to count for something. If the source is a peer-reviewed scientific journal, that ought to count for something. If someone can't back up what they are asserting with anything at all other than how things seem to them, I don't consider that a very strong position.
I've asked you more than once for an instance which illustrates the point you are trying to make and I never get any. I've asked you really specific questions such as "How is a fairer society supposed to come about if people aren't supposed to advocate for their shared needs?" I have yet to get an answer other than that universal socialism will create equality (which is incredibly general and completely fails to address how for hundreds of years and up until 50 years ago when the laws that upheld it were abolished, some demographic groups were openly oppressed in ways that the rest of the culture did not). How exactly will universal socialism address that?
Second, I've actually said to you before that there are issues in what you like to call "woke" culture (which is why I gave Steve's story 50 claps), but that I've never seen you actually touch on them because you are too busy painting with a broad brush or making generalized assertions. For example, the fact that one of the leaders of the BLM movement is now a "millionaire Marxist" says little about the movement as a whole. BLM is a loose affiliation of people with a shared goal - one that has had some significant progress made on it due to their shared advocacy. That one person demonstrates that humans (even those who ostensibly have good intentions) are fallible and prone to human frailty, or it demonstrates that some of them are opportunistic and co-opt social good for their own uses. It says nothing at all about the efficacy of the movement.
"Advocacy organizations are made up of flawed human beings who sometimes do stupid or counterproductive things" is hardly a good case for not having them at all. All organizations are made up of flawed humans beings.
I don't dismiss the things you say because of inferred identity. I dismiss them because they don't make sense, don't hold up to scrutiny, don't have anything to back them up, etc. Whether or not you are literally a white guy is irrelevant when you speak the things that really feel good to whiny white guys -and you do, because I see them lauding you for your positions, even though they are full of holes (the positions, not the white men 😉).
This has gotten so long that I haven't even gotten to the link, but will look at that later. I don't expect this to resolve anything and I don't know how much point there is to continuing to try to talk about any of this.
