Post no. 12

Maybe this should be titled "Calla's Fourty-Third Post." I'm not sure yet, but oh well. "Calla's Fourty-First Post" also had an ambiguous title nature. This frustration is born out of the same class as said post. This man has us read stupid readings. I can tell you that after one day of class.

OK, so let me just tell you about the article "African American Males' Reported Involvement in the Criminal Justice System: A Descriptive Analysis," by one Ron Stewart. Stewart admits many flaws in his study, and for that I respect him. However, there are about a dozen more he didn't notice. And for that I ask why he has A Ph.D. and I don't? And how come if I catch all these flaws, I can't even get a job as a research assistant?

So, I'm not gonna summarize the article. You can get the jist from the title, and you can look it up yourself on JSTOR or something.

Alright first flaw: Two of the characteristics of the survey respondents had to do with "Religious Preference" and "Church Attendance." The possible responses for the former were "Christian" and "Non-Christian." Alright, I am willing to accept this widely limited category if, for no other reason, I have been trained to accept these as fixed categories from all the protestant, college-educated, straight, white males who choose to marginalize the rest of the nation. So fine, Christian v. Non-Christian. (Not really fine, did you catch my sarcasm a minute ago?) Well 38% of the respondents were Non-Christian. The next variable is "Church Attendance." Not "Religious Service," nor "Place of Worship." Nope "Church Attendance." Excuse me for not being shocked that 69% of respondents attend church "infrequently" since 38% ARE NOT CHRISTIAN. Only 19 less people answered the question about church attendance than answered the question about religious preference. That means Non-Christians were answering it. STUPIDITY on Stewart's part.

OK NEXT: "Employment Status." There are two options here Employed or Unemployed. Anyone else catch two flaws with this right off the bat? (1) Underemployed is not an option. (2) There is no follow up to determine whether the employed people are part of the mainstream economy or the "underground" (for lack of better phrase) economy. If I am selling crack full time, and you are selling crack full time I may answer that I am employed and you may answer that you are unemployed. . . FLAWS. Furthermore, if I am selling crack part time and still can't earn enough to support myself, I dang sure feel underemployed, but there is no way for me to express this. So that is two more flaws and we are up to 3 flaws and one really annoying factor.

Flaw 4: The item "getting along with police" as measured by "an item asking respondents how well they and the people in their neighborhood get along with the police." May I emphasize the article "an". . . AN. . . ONE. One question which asks two different things. Well, first off, maybe I'm anti-social and I don't very well KNOW how my neighbors get along with the police, get off your lazy ass and go ask them yourself. Secondly, this is a study focusing on black males. If I am a black male who lives around a lot of people who aren't black, how my neighbors get along with the police is really pretty irrelevant to your study, now isn't it? Thirdly, and here is the really stupid part, TWO QUESTIONS WITH ONE ANSWER. If I hate the police and we fight with each other on a daily basis but my neighbors are all cousins of a police officer whom they love to no end. . . well, I can't answer that question truthfully no matter what I say. So actually that is flaw 4-6. . . and one really annoying factor.

Now, this man chooses to quote another study that I really know nothing about EXCEPT "They found that approximately 50 percent of the non-white, non-Hispanic population reported dissatisfaction with the police." Well, I hate to break it to you AGAIN Ron Stewart. . . non-white non-Hispanic ≠ black. Last I checked my boyfriend was half-Asian. Oh I just checked again, and he still is. He is non-white and non-Hispanic. How he feels about the police should be of no interest to you whatsoever. So, this may be a flaw in the other study. But why is he quoting flawed studies? Or not explaining these studies thoroughly so I don't think it is a flawed study if it is not. So this is flaw # 7 no matter how you slice it.

No let's get to the question on gang membership. Those respondents saying they had been (and one can only assume "or still are" though it is not written into Ron Stewart's report) in a gang got the opportunity to report on in what TYPE of gang activity they were involved. The problem is, it appears they could only answer ONE type of activity. Stewart's number add up to 100%. This means if I were involved in a burglary and an armed robbery I would get to report only one. . . and I could report which ever I so chose. So if I had been involved in like 7 burglaries but they were all a year ago and one armed robbery, which happened last week. . . well, I may very well report the armed robbery because that's the one fresh in my head. (no. 8)

So, I guess that is only 8 flaws and not a dozen. But I have one more flaw with the writing. I can't tell what Stewart's POINT is. It seems to be that black man are disproportionately involved in the criminal justice system. However, he keeps pointing out over and over again that there is a difference in criminal involvement. So I'm sorry. WE DO NEED TO FIX THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM. This is true. But in the mean time, you can't go around pretending like all these men are in prison for crimes they didn't commit when you then admit they're mostly low-level drug offenders. Yeah, you're right, we shouldn't punish people so harshly if they're low-level drug offenders and we should end this "war on drugs" sooner than later. . . BUT THERE ARE STILL JUST MORE BLACK MEN COMMITTING CRIMES. So, since he constantly admits that, I don't know what his point is.

Oh, but may I also remind you he admits flaws in his own research. So maybe there are 12 flaws.

Or maybe he just writes poorly. Maybe all these flaws would be explained if I discussed his research with him in person. Maybe he just had trouble articulating some things in his article. Either way, remind me again WHY he has a Ph.D. if he either can't write or can't do research.

And that's all. And I'm frustrated that people get paid to publish this shit when I've done stronger research during my undergraduate career!!!!!!! AHHHH THE WORLD SUCKS.

(I wonder if Ron Stewart is protestant, straight and white. . . )

Guest Cat IV I know it's strange to have 2 guest cats in a row. . . but Christin was sad that Baby Broder was on display without Titty Tat aka Titters. This is Titters. He lives with my sister and he is a little cuddle love!!!