Kevin Myers writes something repugnant

Teddy_Picker · 10-08-2011 08:48PM

Perhaps the most astounding element in the British television coverage of the riots over much of England has been the steadfast refusal to mention the race of most of the rioters. They are clearly, and overwhelmingly, Afro-Caribbean, the descendants of immigrants, though such has been the utter British failure to integrate so much of the immigrant population that many have retained something of a Caribbean accent. Admittedly, not all of the rioters are "black": clearly, some white youths have joined in.

Now, Myers is just being blatantly pig-ignorant here, anyone that has watched any more than 5 minutes or looked at any coverage of the riots anywhere can see that white guys (and girls) are involved in rioting and looting.

The link between feminism and this perceived rise in single motherhood is extremely fuzzy at best:

Yet that is what our two islands have been doing in a weak-minded, abject capitulation to the feminist ideological dogma that men are really redundant in the family.

What kind of sledgehammer, crude Straw Feminism for Dummies has he been swallowing? The feminist movement isn't some kind of social cleansing designed to rid the world of male influence, I feel like I'm dropping IQ points at an alarming rate even having to type that, but there ya go!

And then there's the stuff he just pulled out his bum-

Moreover, in all societies in the world where Afro-Caribbeans have settled, there is a problem with male teenage gang culture.

Huh? I would love to see some kind of evidence for that, other than, "well it's OBVIOUS as the nose on your face dear, you just don't want to face facts!"

Toby Take a Bow · 10-08-2011 08:50PM

+1 on the correlation/causation confusion. He's using statistics to prove his own ideas, very similar to what the authors of Freakonomics did. It's interesting and entertaining, but dangerous if it's taken seriously.

For example, the '70%' statistic on offspring of single parents leads to Myers criticising single-mothers and society encouraging single mothers. How many of these single-parent families are situations where the mother is the one left? And (as has been mentioned above) why isn't Myers' ire directed towards the fathers who have (presumably) left the mothers? For Myers, it doesn't matter, as one of the main points he'll have - before looking at the statistics is that single-mothers (or feminism, or liberalism) is wrong. He'll look for statistics which seem to prove this point, and hope people follow his reasoning. Which everybody here (for the most part) has done.

realies wrote: »

Just in the same spirit as K Meyers,

Got a phone call from my cousin in london last night, said it was terrifying running and looking for some where safe to stay, eventually they found a good building with no gangs trying to get in, you guessed it, The job centre.

That's so strange. That's nearly identical to a 'joke' that's been going the rounds since the riots first broke out.

My name is URL · 10-08-2011 08:50PM

bigwormbundoran wrote: »

Hes completely right, any woman who has a child out of wedlock should immediately be forced to adopt the child out, or else have it put down, in order to save society from ordeals such as this

Oh ffs

coonecb1 · 10-08-2011 08:51PM

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Don't know about that. But I am glad you call him a film maker and not a documentary film maker. They may have different methods and voice levels, but they both completely distort the truth in such passionate ways.

Even supposing Moore was somehow equivalent to Beck, the important thing is the consequences their ideologies would have if they were to be implemented in full.

If Moore had his way, there would be a social market economy, a non-interventionist foreign policy, and no wars for oil.

If Beck had his way, social programmes would be scrapped, there'd be an elite 10% extremely rich with the rest of the population doomed to poverty, perpetual war and zero environmental protection leading to polluted air, rivers etc.

I know which side I'd tend to favour of those alternative realities

lastlaugh · 10-08-2011 08:53PM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

No its not meaningless but it doesnt mean that its caused by having single parent families. Its correlation is not causation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

Hmmm. interesting, can it be both at the same time I wonder?

Toby Take a Bow · 10-08-2011 08:53PM

My name is URL wrote: »

Oh ffs

I just figured he was taking the p*ss?

My name is URL · 10-08-2011 08:55PM

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

I just figured he was taking the p*ss?

Could be... sometimes it's hard to tell on this forum!

Toby Take a Bow · 10-08-2011 08:56PM

lastlaugh wrote: »

Hmmm. interesting, can it be both at the same time I wonder?

Yeah, but you'd have to prove it. And Myers tends not to bother with that.

Sunnyisland · 10-08-2011 08:58PM

[QUOTE=Toby Take a Bow;73748784That's so strange. That's nearly identical to a 'joke' that's been going the rounds since the riots first broke out.[/QUOTE]

Well sorry about that as i just got the phone call last night, next time i will tell him to be quicker.

The Waltzing Consumer · 10-08-2011 08:58PM

coonecb1 wrote: »

Even supposing Moore was somehow equivalent to Beck, the important thing is the consequences their ideologies would have if they were to be implemented in full.

If Moore had his way, there would be a social market economy, a non-interventionist foreign policy, and no wars for oil.

If Beck had his way, social programmes would be scrapped, there'd be an elite 10% extremely rich with the rest of the population doomed to poverty, perpetual war and zero environmental protection leading to polluted air, rivers etc.

I know which side I'd tend to favour of those alternative realities

Lol, I think both their ideologies are awful and nothing to do with what you wrote. Their only ideology is their own importance.

Moore is not even a tenth of the man that Chomsky is, and even Chomsky is suspect in some of his views.

I remember Moore at a public discussion in Dublin years ago and when some disagreed with him, he shouted them down so aggressively. Moore is interested in being right, and if you got in his way, he is exactly the same as glenn beck.

Reminds me of a this "hippy liberal" dad on wife swap, all dreadlocks and rasta ish, but when someone challenged him on anything, he was the biggest fascist about it. Any extreme is bad.

jam_mac_jam · 10-08-2011 08:59PM

lastlaugh wrote: »

Hmmm. interesting, can it be both at the same time I wonder?

Of course it can, doesnt mean it is however. Real life is not that simple.

The Waltzing Consumer · 10-08-2011 09:00PM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Of course it can, doesnt mean it is however. Real life is not that simple.

and life and prison are certainly not based on studying fallacies and logic.

godspal · 10-08-2011 09:02PM

Freakonomics merely showed that single parents are more likely to have a dysfunctional child.

It did not single out "Black." Myers merely twists the stats to back up his bigoted right wing view.

Oh and the stats he quotes have only tested in America, where there is no social welfare system, where food vouchers barely cover the cost of food for a child, and where the average wage is less than $4 an hour.

Dangerous Man · 10-08-2011 09:10PM

lastlaugh wrote: »

He is a journalist don't forget.

He is writing his opinion on a topical news story, that's the point I would imagine.

Yes but none of that obviates what I said. I know that he is a journalist and I know that he is writing his opinion. However, as I said, an article such as he wrote will do nothing to further rational debate on the subject. It's essentially just shouting soundbites into a howling gale. Pointless.

His article is, frankly, all over the place - and assembled extremely hastily. A better approach would have been to address one of the issues he raised and give it a more substantial treatment rather than the hodgepodge affair he trotted out.

I've always liked Myers actually and agree with him quite a bit (as I said earlier I don't necessarily disagree with the sentiments he expressed in his article) but this won't help not because it's sensationalist - which it is, to a degree - but because it's poorly constructed and will only end up attracting leftist nuts / conservative nuts / feminists / apologists for this, that, and the other.

4Sheets · 10-08-2011 09:17PM

bigwormbundoran wrote: »

Hes completely right, any woman who has a child out of wedlock should immediately be forced to adopt the child out, or else have it put down, in order to save society from ordeals such as this

Show me where he advocated aborting pregnant women.
Its a valid article..hes bringing it to the mainstream so there can be more debate.

KINGVictor · 10-08-2011 09:18PM

bigwormbundoran wrote: »

Hes completely right, any woman who has a child out of wedlock should immediately be forced to adopt the child out, or else have it put down, in order to save society from ordeals such as this

That is an otlandish post. You are not seriously implying that all children born of single women are useless? The world has changed from holding those bigoted, ridiculous assumptions...I think you should too.

previous user · 10-08-2011 09:22PM

Maybe he has a point somewhere in there about single mothers, how does he know that they are all of carribean descent that are rioting?

jam_mac_jam · 10-08-2011 09:23PM

previous user wrote: »

Maybe he has a point somewhere in there about single mothers, how does he know that they are all of carribean descent that are rioting?

Because he knows everything?

El Siglo · 10-08-2011 09:26PM

They are clearly, and overwhelmingly, Afro-Caribbean, the descendants of immigrants, though such has been the utter British failure to integrate so much of the immigrant population that many have retained something of a Caribbean accent.

He can spin that whatever way he wants, but that's pretty repugnant.

They have been raised without the presence of a male authority figure to impose familial order, and furthermore and most vitally, to promote the patriarchy.

Yes, because people with fathers have never rioted or looted before in all of history...

The whole article is a load of bollocks, not one bit of it entails any grounded empirical data, just conjecture slapped together and a total disregard for the underlying issues, such as the problems being structural and institutional and not for the lack of a daddy. Social deprivation occurs when you've a high unemployment, when there's residualisation of housing stock, when the state cuts social expenditure. The UK government has been rolling back on service provision for some time now and unemployment is at the same level as it was in 1989 (about 7.7%).

The Waltzing Consumer · 10-08-2011 09:32PM

El Siglo wrote: »

The whole article is a load of bollocks, not one bit of it entails any grounded empirical data, just conjecture slapped together and a total disregard for the underlying issues, such as the problems being structural and institutional and not for the lack of a daddy. Social deprivation occurs when you've a high unemployment, when there's residualisation of housing stock, when the state cuts social expenditure. The UK government has been rolling back on service provision for some time now and unemployment is at the same level as it was in 1989 (about 7.7%).

I think I heard one of the rioters say that.

But in all seriousness, you have just called myer's article "conjecture slapped together and a total disregard for the underlying issues" and then follow with your own "opinion" and blame what has happened with a load more conjecture slapped together.

Nodin · 10-08-2011 09:34PM

Mahatma coat wrote: »

OK how about the OP counters the Factual Inacuarcies in Myers article

I read it today too, and I have to agree with the man, the Problem stems from Black single parent Familys .........

Better tell all the white and asian fellahs that. Especially the large numbers of white lads out in Manchester.

KINGVictor · 10-08-2011 09:38PM

previous user wrote: »

Maybe he has a point somewhere in there about single mothers, how does he know that they are all of carribean descent that are rioting?

Sorry he no point about single mothers either. There are lots of successful people that were raised in single-parent households!

Yes, the system has been abused and some have taken advantage, but it is wrong for him or anyone to start lecturing or editorialising about blaming the riots on lack of father figures- that is plain rubbish! It could be a factor, but he is not privy to the familial backgrounds of the rioters. He simply wrote a piece on on his preconcieved ideas and position on society.

As for his claim that the rioters were Afro-Carribean and the whites just joined in ( what does that mean??), it shows that his lack of professionalism, utter bias and proves he can't be taken seriously.

annascott · 10-08-2011 09:39PM

I am usually a huge fan of Mr Myers. However, this time I think that he has gone too far. The riot problem is being caused by educationally sub-normal feral council estate dwellers. I don't see what their colour has to do with it.

PaulieBoy · 10-08-2011 09:42PM

Teddy_Picker wrote: »

Kevin Myers uses the London riots as an excuse to go on another tour of his many prejudices- immigrants, single mums, feminists, liberals and, uh, Michael D. Higgins all get a lick of the Kevin stick!

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-feral-rioters-all-have-one-thing-in-common-a-lack-of-father-figures-2844058.html

...and oddly enough Kevin abandons this completely and wildly speculates!

Myers is 100% correct.

mossyc123 · 10-08-2011 09:48PM

El Siglo wrote: »

He can spin that whatever way he wants, but that's pretty repugnant.

Yes, because people with fathers have never rioted or looted before in all of history...

The whole article is a load of bollocks, not one bit of it entails any grounded empirical data, just conjecture slapped together and a total disregard for the underlying issues, such as the problems being structural and institutional and not for the lack of a daddy. Social deprivation occurs when you've a high unemployment, when there's residualisation of housing stock, when the state cuts social expenditure. The UK government has been rolling back on service provision for some time now and unemployment is at the same level as it was in 1989 (about 7.7%).

Just a minor point.

7.7% Unemployment... BIG F*CKING DEAL!!!

Youth Unemployment in Spain is about 45%.

We are at about 14.5% and sending our educated people over there for work.

That level of unemployment is a pathetic excuse for a riot.

end a eknny · 10-08-2011 09:49PM

myers is 100% twat and i would rather poke my eyes out than read anything he would write

lastlaugh · 10-08-2011 09:49PM

The absense of a proper father/authority figures in the 'rioters' lives has a lot to do with their feral behaviour I believe.

Although, what kind of father figures would these cretins make to their children if and when they have them.

Their children are doomed either way...

mossyc123 · 10-08-2011 09:52PM

annascott wrote: »

I am usually a huge fan of Mr Myers. However, this time I think that he has gone too far. The riot problem is being caused by educationally sub-normal feral council estate dwellers. I don't see what their colour has to do with it.

Yep.

The bad relations between the Met and the Afro-Carib community in London were only the starting point of the trouble and overall an irrelevance as things progressed.

It's a general societal problem, more to do with wealth then race.

Nodin · 10-08-2011 09:55PM

KINGVictor wrote: »

Sorry he no point about single mothers either. There are lots of successful people that were raised in single-parent households!

Yes, the system has been abused and some have taken advantage, but it is wrong for him or anyone to start lecturing or editorialising about blaming the riots on lack of father figures- that is plain rubbish! It could be a factor, but he is not privy to the familial backgrounds of the rioters. He simply wrote a piece on on his preconcieved ideas and position on society.

As for his claim that the rioters were Afro-Carribean and the whites just joined in ( what does that mean??), it shows that his lack of professionalism, utter bias and proves he can't be taken seriously.

This is the man who ignored the Marshall plan when it suited his argument to denigrate Haitians, as well as a few hundred years of non-European regiments in the British army when making his little "caucasian faces" rant that went down so well with the BNP. Its gobshites like Colonel Myarse that give the cloak of respectability to racists.

rovert · 10-08-2011 09:56PM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^All gotten too

Kevin Myers writes something repugnant

Comments