I feel like on multiple occasions on this forum I've heard people say things like "Boston is a good city for white people", or "white people like Boston", or something along those lines. I just don't understand why people say these things when Boston isn't intensly more white or less diverse than other major US cities, like San Francisco. And I don't think I've ever heard SF refered to as a "white" city. In fact, I feel as though, unlike Boston, diversity is often mentioned as one of SF's strong points.
Boston: SF:
47% white 42% white
24% black 6% black
9% asian 33% asian
18% hispanic 15% hispanic
2% 2 or more races 7% other races
5% 2 or more races
Boston is the second most asian city on the east coast, ahead of DC, Philly, Baltimore, Miami, and is also more asian than Chicago, Houston, Dallas, Minneapolis, Atlanta, and Pittsburgh.
On the same note, Boston is blacker than Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Seattle, San Diego, and Miami. and its practically on par with NYC, Dallas, Houston, and Pittsburgh.
Its more hispanic than Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington DC, Seattle, Atlanta, Minneapolis.
using percentages of course...
-------
So then why is boston a "white" city?
It doesn't have any one huge minority that accompanies its majority, like asians in SF, whites in DC, or blacks/whites in Philly, but wouldn't the fact that it has an even spread of minorities compared to these cities mean that it is in fact more diverse than them?
It has a very white metro area, but so do Miami and Detroit and yet few consider these to be "white" cities. Is there a double standard?
Boston had some race problems 40 years ago, but other cities had similar issues at some point as well.
So if those aren't the reasons, how did this stereotype of Boston being a "white" city come to be?
Also, if you think that few people see Boston as a "white" city feel free to disagree with my observations.
Boston: SF:
47% white 42% white
24% black 6% black
9% asian 33% asian
18% hispanic 15% hispanic
2% 2 or more races 7% other races
5% 2 or more races
Boston is the second most asian city on the east coast, ahead of DC, Philly, Baltimore, Miami, and is also more asian than Chicago, Houston, Dallas, Minneapolis, Atlanta, and Pittsburgh.
On the same note, Boston is blacker than Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Seattle, San Diego, and Miami. and its practically on par with NYC, Dallas, Houston, and Pittsburgh.
Its more hispanic than Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington DC, Seattle, Atlanta, Minneapolis.
using percentages of course...
-------
So then why is boston a "white" city?
It doesn't have any one huge minority that accompanies its majority, like asians in SF, whites in DC, or blacks/whites in Philly, but wouldn't the fact that it has an even spread of minorities compared to these cities mean that it is in fact more diverse than them?
It has a very white metro area, but so do Miami and Detroit and yet few consider these to be "white" cities. Is there a double standard?
Boston had some race problems 40 years ago, but other cities had similar issues at some point as well.
So if those aren't the reasons, how did this stereotype of Boston being a "white" city come to be?
Also, if you think that few people see Boston as a "white" city feel free to disagree with my observations.
Those white boys were getting worked.
Its so demonic, friend. 
What's the story behind this ?