Part 1– Black Disrespect for White Women – Western Voices World News

<o:p> </o:p>

As 2010
gets underway and Tiger Woods fades for a time into the background, it is worth
looking back to try to understand the significance of his affairs. With only a
little thought, we are left with troubling questions about Tiger and what he
represents that go beyond scandal. The number of his paramours has peaked (at
least for now) at 14, and his badly betrayed wife Elin has reportedly hired a
high-caliber attorney for the purposes of divorce, though most recently he has
allegedly entered a rehabilitation clinic in Mississippi to treat his serial
adulteries and possibly save his marriage. The mass media have portrayed his
story, of course, as nothing more than that of a highly talented and
tremendously well-compensated American athlete who went wrong and indulged
widely in extramarital affairs with willing, amoral tarts over his five years
of marriage. His affairs may in a sense be over, but in another sense what
multicultural Tiger did to Nordic Elin is symbolic of a much more
comprehensive, ongoing offense. <o:p />

Tiger had been marketed by the media and his corporate
sponsors as, to quote Lisa Schiffren, “an all-purpose icon: a man of personal
rectitude, a lovely smile, apparent openness; a family man, with a lovely wife
and two adorable babies.” The Woods image was “constructed for corporate
consumption” for business reasons. Though the talent was real, the image was a
“fraud,” “an act,” manufactured for corporate profits. He was also, because of
the marriage of the dark-skinned Tiger to the pure Nordic (blond, blue-eyed,
very white-skinned) Elin, packaged, or at least understood by some to be, to
quote Schiffren again, “our first living embodiment of the collective hope for
racial reconciliation.” It all went very well for a while until this particular
deck of cards came crashing down on November 27th.

<o:p> </o:p>

Citing class reasons (corporate profits) as the underlying
motive for the construction and maintenance of this false idol only begins to
tell the story, however. It is undeniable that large enterprises like Nike, Gillette, AT&T,
and Gatorade did have a stake in portraying Tiger as a clean-cut all-American,
and, according to Shiffren, some of his philandering, as well as his “personal
nastiness, arrogance, and general non-cuddly nature”, may have been known to at
least a couple of his corporate sponsors and media outlets. He is rumored to
the most-fined player on the Professional Golfers Association Tour, throwing
his clubs and having a dirty mouth (frequent “audible obscenities”), among
other things, something that could not have escaped the attention of all his
class benefactors. Other dynamics than increasing class wealth are in play,
however.

<o:p> </o:p>

First, to state the obvious, Tiger himself is a member of
that class. His wealth lies somewhere in the $500 million to one billion dollar
range. The coverups of his character flaws, to the extent these coverups
existed, were done in collusion with him, for his personal profit. He knew he
was not the clean-cut, all-American male he was presented as, yet raked in his
sponsorship fees nevertheless.

<o:p> </o:p>

Second, his philandering could not have happened were it not
for his wealth and fame. It is highly unlikely that he would have been the
target of so many attractive women if he were a handyman or office clerk, for example. His
infidelities were enabled by his membership in his class and are a result of the
way wealth and fame are distributed in the United States.

<o:p> </o:p>

It would be too much to say the wealth-infidelity connection
is causal, however. Presumably, most wealthy people do not engage in
extramarital affairs to the extent Tiger did. Though wealth made it possible,
the causality must lie elsewhere.

<o:p> </o:p>

This brings us back to the mass media’s portrayal of Tiger’s
affairs as the result of the weaknesses of a single man, a man who perhaps let
his talent and success go to his head, but his transgressions the problems of
an individual man nevertheless. Other professional athletes like Kobe Bryant,
Alex Rodriguez, Michael Jordan, Wade Boggs, and Babe Ruth have had the same
problem, though none except for Ruth to the same or greater degree, and there
is no reason to suspect infidelity is significantly more typical of
professional athletes than of other males. (Joe Namath and Wilt Chamberlain are
often included in lists like this but frequented women only as bachelors.) The
rambunctiousness of professional golfers in particular remains to be
documented. Nevertheless, professional athletics does bring with it money and
fame, facilitating the sexual and relational appropriation of women. The
question is whether this provides a full explanation of Tiger’s proclivities.
The answer is that his profession most likely does not, since most professional
athletes, at least married ones, abstain from such extensive philandering as
Tiger’s.

<o:p> </o:p>

Class and profession provide dynamic semi-causal social
forces that, as suggested, are insufficient in cases like Tiger’s to explain
all forms of behavior. Society comprises other social groupings than class and
profession, however, so for a full analysis of Tiger’s behavior we are
scientifically and rationally obliged to look at other social groupings to see
if they might explain, or at least add to the explanation of, what Tiger did.
This includes heritage.

<o:p> </o:p>

The Significance of Heritage<o:p />

<o:p> </o:p>

In order to understand whether and which of Tiger’s cultural
backgrounds may have helped compel his infidelities and thus make his a group
and not just personal issue, it would be helpful first to look at one indicator
of fidelity rates—the percentage of families headed by two parents. Though
perhaps not ordinarily considered a mark of fidelity, two-parent households can
be taken to demonstrate fidelity in the sense that they show (in most cases)
that the male is willing to remain faithful to the female and children at least
by remaining a member of the household,
particularly as a married spouse. A single-parent household, in turn,
particularly one headed by a female, would appear to indicate infidelity on the
part of the other parent, usually the male, in the sense that the absent parent
has decided not to remain faithful to his partner. This represents a deeper
kind of infidelity—the unwillingness to be a father at all, and males are no
doubt responsible for a significant percentage of this. “There is racial
variation in the proportion of families headed by a single parent: 22 percent
for white, 57 percent for black, and 33 percent for Hispanic families.” Even
though single-parent, most of these “families” were by far in the year 2000
headed by women: 90.1 percent of black single-parent households and 79.3
percent of white single-parent households. Most black children under age 18
(58.27 percent) lived with one parent, compared to 23 percent of all white
children under age 18 that same year. Further, almost 70 percent of black
children are born to single mothers, compared to 24 percent of white children
born to single mothers, a multiple of 2.92, nearly three times as many. The
latter is a kind of infidelity, a familial and not only marital infidelity, to
expand the meaning a bit, that rejects obligations to the woman, marriage,
family, and fatherhood even prior to a child’s birth. And, according to Treas
and Giesen, being a black male is associated with an increased risk of
infidelity even within marriage. The reason for these disparities is unclear,
but it is probably safe to assume male irresponsibility and sexual opportunism
play a significant role, much more so for black males. When it comes to
infidelity, heritage and culture do
make a difference.

<o:p> </o:p>

Group membership and heritage also make a difference—and a
substantial one—in matters of rape and
sexual assault. Though obviously not physically violent like rape, infidelity
shares characteristics with rape and sexual assault in that both involve an
intentional violation of a woman’s integrity. Rape directly violates a woman’s
integrity in the act itself and involves violence and non-consent, while the
violation inherent in infidelity manifests more indirectly, via another woman
or other women, and, while lacking the application of violence, also involves
non-consent, in this case the lack of consent of the wife. Though infidelity is
not a crime, it is linked to rape and sexual assault in these ways as a
physically, though not necessarily emotionally, milder attack on a woman’s
integrity and a tendency to regard a woman merely as a sexual object.
Though significant differences exist
between infidelity, on the one hand, and rape and sexual assault on the other,
they are not mutually exclusive. All are characterized by a significant degree
of mistreatment of women, emotional and/or physical, in pursuit of libidinal
satisfaction. These activities lie along a common continuum of behavior against
women, and differ in degree, not entirely by kind.

<o:p> </o:p>

In Tiger’s case, even with his multicultural heritage, it is
still possible to detect probabilities for the occurrence of rape and sexual
assault by culture. He is by birth one-quarter Chinese, one-quarter Thai,
one-quarter African American, one-eighth Native American, and one-eighth Dutch.
Since in the U.S. the Asian ethnicities are generally combined in federal
statistics, this means Tiger is one-half Asian, one-quarter African American,
one-eighth Native American, and one-eighth Dutch. Looking at federal crime
statistics, Asian participation in rape, which, once again, we are subsuming
under the larger category of basic violations of female integrity, we find that
in 2008 Asians and Pacific Islanders committed only 1.4 percent of rapes in
cases where arrests were made. An Asian heritage has an extremely low
probability of contributing to this kind of behavior. Tiger’s white heritage in
turn might contribute: Out of 148,110 rapes and sexual assaults in 2005,
49,613, or 33.5 percent, were committed by white males. Of these, 100 percent
were against white women, none (10 or less statistically) against black women.
(Unfortunately, this data is somewhat suspect because the authors include
Hispanic whites in the perpetrator category, leaving it uncertain how many of
these rapes were committed by non-Hispanic whites like those of Tiger’s Dutch
background.) At 33.5 percent of total rapes and sexual assaults, Tiger’s white
heritage could have increased the likelihood of his infidelity toward Elin and
the role of whatever motivated him to commit multiple adulteries. At one-eighth
his ethnic makeup, however, this likelihood would diminish if other elements of
his makeup are more active or show more drive in this direction.

<o:p> </o:p>

His African American heritage would have played a larger
role, at one-quarter of his background. According to the Department of Justice, in 2005, after Tiger had married
Elin, blacks committed 74,081 rapes and sexual assaults, or 50 percent of the
total against all women. This included 37,461 rapes against white women, or
33.6 percent of the total against white women, and 36,620 rapes and sexual
assaults against black women, 100 percent of the total. Overall, black males
committed 24,468 more rapes and sexual assaults than white males.

<o:p> </o:p>

Percentages and total numbers fail to tell the whole story,
however. The relative strengths of the tendency toward rape and sexual assault
must also be taken into account. Though black males committed 24,468 more rapes
and sexual assaults in 2005 than white males, their likelihood of doing so was
much higher than this number would indicate. That year, whites comprised 198.4
million of the nation’s population of 296.4 million, or about 67 percent.
Blacks comprised only 39.7 million, or 13.4 percent. Holding the ratio of males
and females roughly equal, the number of white males was five times the number
of black males. If black and white propensities toward rape and sexual assault
were equal, black males would have committed 9,922.6 violations. They did not,
and rather committed 74,081. This is an increase by a multiple of 7.47. In
other words, any given black male was 7.47 times more likely to commit rape and
sexual assault than any given white male.

<o:p> </o:p>

Tiger is not a rapist. He is one of those any given blacks,
however. Or, to be more precise, his black heritage is significantly 2.92 times
more likely to abandon women and children at birth, more likely to commit
extramarital infidelity, and (using the year 2005 as a baseline or as a
possibility) 7.47 times more likely to commit rape and sexual assault than his
white heritage. Since his background is 2:1 black to white, this makes his
black heritage 5.84 times more likely to abandon women and children and 14.93
times as likely to commit rape and sexual assault than his white heritage.

<o:p> </o:p>

Extramarital infidelity, abandonment, and rape and sexual
assault are differing phenomena, but are also linked—intrinsically—because of
their common denominator as basic forms of mistreatment of women. They all
denote a certain contempt for women, or at least a willingness to use them
merely as sexual objects, which can be considered a kind of contempt that
reduces women to less-than-human status. This occurs without or outside the
personal commitment involved in monogamy or in consideration of the woman’s
thoughts and feelings. These phenomena, as noted, are parts of a continuum
rather than discrete categories, all embodying certain attitudes toward women
that exploit their sexuality or their trust. As shown, the propensities toward
infidelity, abandonment, rape, and sexual assault are much stronger among black
males than white males. The Swedish school system was negligent in failing to
inform Elin of relevant facts like these during her education so that she would
know her position better before she married Tiger, and it should bear part of
the responsibility for what happened to her.

<o:p> </o:p>

A Justification for Separation <o:p />

<o:p> </o:p>

A propensity toward the acts in question would be
insignificant if their consequences were minimal or the number of infidelities
and more violent acts was small. So the question arises whether black rapes and
sexual assaults—the more serious, harmful, and dangerous end of the anti-female
continuum, amounting to over 74,000 for the year 2005 alone—merit a response,
and if so, what kind of response.

<o:p> </o:p>

Rape is a violent crime, and its effects can last several
months or more.

<o:p> </o:p>

Victims of rape can be severely
traumatized by the assault and may have difficulty functioning as well as they
had been used to prior to the assault, with disruption of concentration,
sleeping patterns and eating habits, for example. They may feel jumpy or be on
edge. After being raped it is common for the victim to experience Acute Stress
Disorder, including symptoms similar to those of posttraumatic stress disorder,
such as intense, sometimes unpredictable, emotions, and they may find it hard
to deal with their memories of the event. In the months immediately following
the assault these problems may be severe and very upsetting and may prevent the
victim from revealing their ordeal to friends or family, or seeking police or
medical assistance. Additional symptoms of Acute Stress Disorder include:

<o:p> </o:p>

<!–[if !supportLists–>· depersonalization or dissociation (feeling numb
and detached, like being in a daze or a dream, or feeling that the world is
strange and unreal) <!–[endif–>

<!–[if !supportLists–>· difficulty remembering important parts of the
assault <!–[endif–>

<!–[if !supportLists–>· reliving the assault through repeated thoughts,
memories, or nightmares <!–[endif–>

<!–[if !supportLists–>· avoidance of things, places, thoughts, and/or
feelings that remind the victim of the assault <!–[endif–>

<!–[if !supportLists–>· anxiety or increased arousal (difficulty
sleeping, concentrating, etc.) <!–[endif–>

<!–[if !supportLists–>· avoidance of social life or place of rape <!–[endif–>

<o:p> </o:p>

For one-third to one-half of the
victims, these symptoms continue beyond the first few months and meet the
conditions for the diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder. … In general,
rape and sexual assault are among the most common causes of PTSD in women.

<o:p> </o:p>

In determining the appropriate response to these crimes,
then, not only the probabilities of their occurrence but also their
psychological and social consequences (those from rape probably the worst and
most debilitating) must be considered.

<o:p> </o:p>

Current society, based on the civil rights ideology, does
not appear to handle these issues—let us say charges against it—well.
Presumably most Americans are raised and educated to believe that infidelity,
rape, and sexual assault are wrong. That leaves larger police forces
(prevention) and imprisonment (for rape and sexual assault) as the only
responses civil society can offer.

<o:p> </o:p>

Imprisonment is post facto, too late to prevent these
crimes. Larger police forces, in turn, though they will not prevent infidelity,
may lessen the amount of rape and sexual assault. This remedy is subject to
fluctuating municipal budgets, however, particularly during economic downturns.
It would also leave in place conditions that facilitate rape and assault.

<o:p> </o:p>

What these conditions are is unclear. Various theories
attempt to explain them. These include theories emphasizing conflict, which
includes Marxist economic determinism, social control, social discrimination,
subcultural violence, anomie, IQ, r/K, and macrostructural opportunity. These
are in addition to the older, classical (emphasizing free will), positivist
(emphasizing “criminogenic properties”), and critical schools, the latter now
known as conflict theory.

<o:p> </o:p>

Most of these theories would appear to focus on changing
black male circumstances for the better in order to decrease their crime rates.
Clearly, if the means can be found, females and their social circles would be
better off; the same can be said for white males in this context, though with
less relevance. Taking this approach assumes two things, however: first, that meaningful
reductions in infidelity, rape, and sexual assault will result, and second,
that it is worth continuing to subject females, especially white, to the
predations of black males while waiting for these improvements to occur, if
they ever do.

<o:p> </o:p>

The ongoing damage and danger to white females is emphasized
for a reason. Whites, white males in particular, could take responsibility for
all infidelity, rape, and sexual assault in the country, and expand their
concern to all females, including blacks. This would place responsibility for
black male behavior on whites, however, and deprive blacks of it, a subtle form
of social imperialism.

<o:p> </o:p>

It would also, given the differences in white and black male
infidelity, rape and sexual assault rates, unfairly burden whites with
responsibility for behavior belonging to others. This is true even if white
economic advantage is blamed for black male sexual aggression: Causality
between relative poverty and theft might be comprehensible, but the link
between relative poverty and rape and sexual assault seems far-fetched and
unreal.

<o:p> </o:p>

If a person is poor, he may steal what he needs. If a person
is poor, it is questionable how rape would satisfy that need. It seems rather
to have nothing to do with it, and have other another aim, like that of
pleasure. Economic determinism as an explanation for infidelity, rape, and
sexual assault would appear to be weak and even irrational, not only because of
the illogical link between poverty and sexual crimes, but especially because
white males commit significantly fewer rapes and sexual assaults than blacks
but have as many if not more members living in poor economic conditions. On
both counts, then—social imperialism and economic determinism—white
responsibility for black male rapes and sexual assaults, if not infidelity,
would appear falsely ascribed. Rather, white males and white society would
appear to have responsibility to protect white females from black males, as
well as white males, who threaten them.

<o:p> </o:p>

At first glance, it would seem white society has a duty to
protect white females from both white males and black males equally. On closer
examination, this is not entirely true. For one thing, it is more important to
protect against a greater threat—in this case, black males. Because of this,
different measures could be taken against each group of males, more regulatory
against the greater threat and non-regulatory (and only punitive) against the
lesser threat. Secondly, a society should be able to protect itself from any
deterioration of standards by outside influences. Even if it is imperfect, in
other words, it would seem to have the right to prevent more decay than what is
already present within itself. This latter is probably the most conservative
and least socially disruptive principle in the case at hand, but the one also
most liberating in terms of crime prevention to the extent it targets the
origin of a threat shown to be significantly more dangerous in degree than other groups presenting threats
of the same kind. A rape and sexual assault rate that is 7.47 times greater in
one group (black males) than in another group (white males) would appear to
meet the criterion of a pattern of behavior that endangers a population and
lowers its standards.

<o:p> </o:p>

It must thus be asked whether the rape and sexual assault of
white women to the extent of 37,461 (in
2005) and a rape and sexual assault rate that is 7.47 times greater in one
group (black males) than in another group (white males) constitute a threat
serious enough to warrant protective measures. This figure (for that year) is
only 0.037 percent of white females, assuming about 100 million white females
in the total population. The number may be large, but the percentage is small.
It may also be less than accurate, since many females, perhaps roughly the same
number, do suffer rape and sexual assault but refuse to report it to the
police. This is not an easy question to answer; it is, however, a question that
must be raised, discussed, and answered if the integrity of women, if not their
mental health and lives, is considered worthwhile to protect. The “relatively”
low numbers and percentages take on a different significance, however, if they
indicate new or previously unraped and unassaulted women.

<o:p> </o:p>

When 37,461 women are raped and sexually assaulted annually
and most or all of these women have previously been spared these crimes, the
figures begin to add up. Over five years, 37,461 becomes 187,305, and 0.037
percent becomes 0.185 percent. Over 10 years, 37,461 becomes 374,610, and 0.037
percent becomes 0.37 percent. Over 20 years, 37,461 becomes 749,220 and 0.037
percent becomes 0.74 percent. If only half of women report these crimes against
them, the annual figure would be 74,922, or 0.074 percent, and the 20-year
figure 1,498,440, or 1.48 percent. Undeniably, the numbers of rapes and sexual
assaults may in any given year be less or more, and over a five-, 10-, or
20-year period average less or more.

<o:p> </o:p>

It is probably as a result of this annual accumulation that
the National Violence Against Women Survey could report in 1998 that over one
in six U.S. women (of all races and ethnicities) has experienced an
attempted or completed rape, about 18 percent. More of these rapes are
committed by black rather than white men by a ratio of 1.5 to one, and
disproportionately by black men, as shown, by a ratio of 7.47 to one in 2005.
If the 2005 statistics are representative, this means as many as 4.5 percent of
white women are at any given time sexual victims of black males. That is about
one in 22, or roughly 4,500,000 white women. This is more than the
populations of 28 states (in the year 2008), and could be higher given the
tendency of some women to refuse to admit to this kind of victimization. This
figure is an objective moment of history, not a subjective product of prejudice
or racism as the Left would suggest.

<o:p> </o:p>

The number 4,500,000 would appear to be significant. It
means that as many as one in 22 white women we see at work, shopping, walking
on the sidewalks, and driving in cars is likely a victim of a black male.
Whether this number is a call to action depends upon how much we value white
women, their integrity in terms of freedom from sexual violation, their
psychological health, and their lives. These statistics particularly call into
question what it means to be a male and what it means to be a society, whether
it is the duty of a male to take steps to protect females and whether it is the
duty of a healthy society to protect females.

<o:p> </o:p>

Although chivalry is one way to approach this question, as is
love, it can also be said that one measure of the progress or stage of
development of a civilization is the degree to which it prevents the sexual
violation of women. Currently, the absence of rape and sexual assault is
probably no more than a minimal standard. Condoning or tolerating these acts in
turn would appear to be a mark of a more primitive or barbaric state, a more
uncivilized society satisfied to sacrifice some of its human values for the
sake of other goals. Tolerance here would also put into question a society’s
commitment to human values, in this case freedom from rape and sexual assault.

<o:p> </o:p>

White America is far from perfect. As mentioned, however, it
is irrational and even masochistic to be expected to accept degeneration from
what standards do exist. If black males exhibit significantly worse behavior
with regard to females than white males, then the goal of protecting white
females from them is authentic not only as a question of female safety but also
of human values (freedom from sexual crimes) and civilizational standards. It
is also authentic because the number 4,500,000 is too large to ignore, a figure
more indicative of wartime than so-called peace. The lesser threat from white
males would have to be dealt with in other ways.

<o:p> </o:p>

Ideally, since they represent a much greater danger than
white males, a way would be found to cordon white women off totally from black
males except under secure and voluntary conditions. This is strictly speaking
impractical, if not heavy-handed, since it would mean erecting a system of pass
cards and border checks between black and white neighborhoods and communities
like they have in Israel and had in the Soviet Union and South Africa. More
feasible and appropriate would be a system that reduces or minimizes black
males’ access to white women.

<o:p> </o:p>

Economic enterprises form the bulk of establishments that
adults frequent. Currently, blacks and whites have equal access to areas of
economic activity. This includes both workplaces and shopping locations. It
stands to reason, therefore, that concentrating whites in areas of white
economic activity and concentrating blacks in areas of black economic activity
is a logical first step to reducing sexual threats to white women. This could
be beneficial to blacks regardless if it gave them control over their economic
resources (something promoted by black nationalists like W.E.B. Du Bois and
Malcolm X, in contrast to the deep and abiding negligence of this by black
liberals, who won the civil rights battle), but regrettably black male criminal
activities currently have to be taken into account also as motives for such an
arrangement. Economic separation, in other words, would be an important first
step in protecting white women from the ongoing problem of predatory black
males. Educational separation, especially if linked to jobs for black males in
black communities, would be an important second or concurrent step. Economic
separation would mean black males would have less reason to be in white
society.

<o:p> </o:p>

The resulting black economic independence would also likely
make blacks as owners of their own capital better off, especially if jobs are
guaranteed and physical and intellectual capital disseminated among black
communities, helping meet the argument that crime is rooted in economic
determinism with a practical program. “Little Africas,” like the one blacks
wanted to set up in Detroit, would sprout up and blacks would no longer have to
be subservient to the larger or more organized white, Jewish, and other
minority economies. Ultimately, economic loyalty and favoritism would be
enforced, so that blacks would be required to work at and buy from black
businesses and whites work at and buy from white businesses in most cases. The
theory is that black economic separation and development—self-determination—would
reduce the opportunities and need for predatory black males to be around white
females. A subset or corollary of this theory is that steady work, ownership,
and responsibility, not to mention stable nuclear families, might serve as a
partial substitute for sexual demands, benefiting white and black women both. Continue

<o:p> </o:p>

2010-01-26