Is their any need to mention race of suspicious person? Facebook..

[tiredandfrumpy]

I'm on our local community facebook group and some lady has mentioned that some black man was trying to offer her daughter sweets and was offering her back to his house.

I could understand if she had a real description but you can't just warn people of a black man? People are going to be terrified if they see a black man now.

AIBU or is that an ok way of describing someone to watch out for?

Not trying to cause a war here just curious on what people think.

And obviously its so much more racist for being completely made up. Scarily so tbh.

Its also slightly terrifying that so many MNers read the OP and their first thoughts weren't pity/anger/disbelief at the twisted, bored twat who posted this on FB.

@mustlovegin

Why is everyone ignoring the fact that the person on FB completely made up the story?

Why would you not believe a victim?

What victim?

I once had to point out someone in my office to someone who was visiting from another branch. The person they were looking for was the only black person in the room. I dithered about how to describe her to the visitor despite the simplest way being blatantly obvious. Oddly enough I found I had no hesitation pointing out the only redheaded person in the room.

@mustlovegin cant answer for this case but stories like this go round on our local FB group quite often and then a message 48 hours later saying that actually it didnt happen. Latest one was about a woman being attacked and chased in the local woods. That ended up being a woman being suspicious of "a man in the bushes" - who turned out to be picking litter as part of the local environment groups work day. No attack, no chase, and he turned out to be white which was not how the story was originally reported.

What victim?

Would you also have downplayed her victimhood if the little girl was non white and the man with the sweets was white?

stories like this go round on our local FB group quite often and then a message 48 hours later saying that actually it didn't happen

Well, that's awful, but it doesn't mean all incidents should be just ignored

OP: AIBU?
MN: Yes, you are.
OP: No I'm not.

Don’t be stupid. If the man was 6’10 wouldn’t you expect it to be mentioned they were tall in a description? Why leave you vital info that can help you recognise them. It’s not offensive at all, in fact if anything it would be more offensive to leave it out. (I am
Black).

@AlfonsoTheDinosaur

OP: AIBU? MN: Yes, you are. OP: No I'm not.

Except from all the people agreeing with the OP.

If he is white you could maybe also point out his hair and eye colour, if black then you don't need to say 'black man with black hair' etc. Also it was a child so maybe she didn't remember how long his hair was or anything else.

If they were white I would expect to hear 'white man around (age)' with other identifying details if there were any. It's not racist to mention race.

@Heiferr Is it ok to use ONLY the skin colour of a person when describing someone that the community should be wary of? No

Absolutely yes when the person describing is 4 or 5 years of age and the population is beyond heavily white. Of course it is ok. What 'other' terms are you going to give them?'

So @puddlebubble if youd read that Facebook post how would you use the information given to protect your child? Would you:

• tell them to beware of all black men?
• tell them to beware of all black men offering them sweets?

-tell them to beware of all men offering them sweets?

If you spotted a black man in the neighbourhood the next day would you have been extra wary because he might be the one?

@Porcupineintherough I have already said I understand the OP's point. RTFT. I can't bear it when people just don't fucking read what was said and want to proselytize. READ IT.

I see lots of posts about suspicious behaviour (admin a community page).
They often include video from ring doorbells etc. The videos get posted regardless of the skin colour of the person. The sex is mentioned if it's a female. They generally only mention race if they are black/eastern European looking and don't mention it if the person is white. They tend to mention if the person is middle aged or older.

It's because in this area, suspicious people are generally younger white males. Females, older and black descriptors are used as they are less usual in such situations.
It's not bias against people of colour, women or older people.

Of course bias exists- but not in this situation.

Except from all the people agreeing with the OP.
Exactly.

Just to say a black man is a bit pathetic.

You wouldn't say a white man, partly because if someone said a man was at the gate, in most places there are many more white men so people would assume 'a man at the gate' is white.

But just to say black man when there are many but not predominantly black men is a bit off - I would think any description would include more info - a black man with a blue jacket, or a white man with a scottish accent, or a white man with a beard. So I would lean to saying it is racist.

@MamsellMarie again not in a society where approx 87% are white and the child is 4 or 5. Cop on.

@puddlebubble this isnt a criticism of a small child ffs! It's asking questions about how useful that particular descriptor is when pasted all over Facebook as a warning.

I think this is about difference, and we're talking about a child (age unspecified). If the child was black, but the offender (if he exists) was white, I suggest that white man would have been part of their description and may well have been said on Fb.

So if all the info they have is the person is black they shouldn't warn others? Can you report the person is black to the police? If you dnt have any more info should you just let it slide?

Of course you'd tell the police, but theyd be (hopefully) trying to find the perpetrator/suspect. The question is what are the general public supposed to do with this information? How does it help them keep their children safe?

[quote puddlebubble]**@Heiferr* Is it ok to use ONLY the skin colour of a person when describing someone that the community should be wary of? No*

Absolutely yes when the person describing is 4 or 5 years of age and the population is beyond heavily white. Of course it is ok. What 'other' terms are you going to give them?'[/quote]
None. Because as you've pointed out, we're talking about a young child.

Would I then as an adult with an ounce of sense go posting that limited description all over Facebook? No, there would be no need because an adult with even the most basic understanding of how the world works would be aware what the consequences of that would be. Not that you'd know it from the racism deniers on this thread.

The black man must have others things to him beside the colour of his skin. Did he have hair, was it close shave, tall, short, old, young?

Just identify his race only is ridiculous unless you think it’s okay for all black men to be under suspicion. By all means mention his race but if that’s all you can see and take note of, then there is a problem. One black man is not all black men.

I am fairly sure that if it was a white man, we would have been told more than just “a white man”. We would have heard about his hair colour, or his height, etc. We would be told a young blond man, etc.

I thought I was going to say YABU but actually in this case I'd say it's coming from a racist place. I doubt she'd have said "some white man" if there'd been an actual description then obviously skin colour is a key identifier but skin colour alone is not an identifier.

I once reported a really noisy party to the police. (It was ridiculously loud). The police asked for a description and the only thing I could think of was that they were all black. I felt really bad about it!