|
Post by Orbs on Jul 1, 2020 6:34:13 GMT
That just doesn’t make any sense. How do you categorise serious cases? Racism is racism isn’t it? What would you define as a ‘serious case of racism?’ Surely they are all serious? It’s not really an over reaction either. You appear to think that racism is ok ‘everything is challenged however small’ is what you said as a criticism. By definition you’re saying its ok as long as it’s small. BTW I never mentioned the coco pops packet we are referring to the commentator findings from the independent study here. They have found there’s clearly an issue. As you also say ‘pyscho analysing every discrepancy in life’ is wrong. . We ought to be pyscho analysing it otherwise it will continue to exist unchallenged. You can’t pick and choose. So what your saying is that every time a black person is unhappy with the result of something whether it’s a job interview, bad decision in a game, advertising campaign that they can claim the decision is racialy motivated. As I said in the original post what would happen if the original issue was the other way around could they claim that was racist because more often they were deemed as weak and cumbersome. As a white person who goes to the gym could I claim to be unhappy that white people are depicted in that way. In relation to the findings how do you suggest they’re resolved the only way I see it is to have no commentry other than in highlights so that everything can be checked and vetted before going out. Commentary is a very distinctive thing and every commentator will be worried that they might say something that could offend so will keep it very simple and not giving opinion because they’ll be terrified what they say offend and they might lose their job. If this issue is addressed what’s to say that something else is raised a couple of months down the line say Burnley have less black players in there first team than any other PL team or why are there a low number of black club physios. Nope. Not saying that at all. It looks like you're falling into the trap of putting words in into other posters mouths. Just read the article - it's all in there.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 6:36:18 GMT
Again... Totally needless character assassination attempt, after what was a sensible post. Nothing to do with character assassination - He said 'We need to look at the serious cases.' By definition saying that some cases of racism are more serious than others. Just asking the question. Don't act dumb mate. We all know that some cases are more serious than others and we all know what you were trying to insinuate.
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jul 1, 2020 6:38:46 GMT
Nothing to do with character assassination - He said 'We need to look at the serious cases.' By definition saying that some cases of racism are more serious than others. Just asking the question. Don't act dumb mate. We all know that some cases are more serious than others and we all know what you were trying to insinuate. Acting dumb? 'We need to look at the serious cases.' That is literally what was typed. I'm not 'insinuating' anything. It was a serious question.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 6:41:07 GMT
Again.. Never claimed racism didn't exist EVER. Just disputed the validity of the report. As Cobham mentioned. You've taken the patronising self righteous route of starting to insinuate others are racist when they don't agree with your sentiments. 20 Prem games (and 20 from x3 other leagues) over an entire season is fuck all. It's not even one teams total number of games. It could be 20x Man City games in which case you have sterling getting praise for pace and Silva getting praise for creativity every match. The sample size when put into perspective is inconsequential and gives totally inconclusive results, regardless of how relevant you try to spin it. You obviously aren't reading what I've typed. It literally says 'For someone who accepts that racism does exist' It's pretty hard to discuss this if you aren't even understanding the basic of sentences and meanings. So your next bit of 'You've taken the patronising self righteous route of starting to insinuate others are racist when they don't agree with your sentiments.' is also totally inaccurate because as you can (hopefully) see now that's not what I said. It was you yesterday saying about putting words in other posters mouths - just like you've done there and 100% wrongly. Like I said you admit it exists (for clarity for you) and then constantly go out of you way to try and show that it doesn't. Your next line of: 'The sample size when put into perspective is inconsequential and gives totally inconclusive results, regardless of how relevant you try to spin it' - It was taken off the BBC website so I'm not trying to spin anything - just reading what it says in the article. Thee BBC obviously think it isn't inconsequential and gives inconclusive results otherwise they wouldn't have posted it. To be fair, I don't need to 'admit' that it exists because I've never denied that it exists. Do you 'admit' that it exists or just acknowledge it. Secondly, I don't go out of my way to prove otherwise. I simply don't consider every slight vs a black person as racism. I take things into perspective and think about things before blindly accepting them, which is more than can be said for yourself.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Jul 1, 2020 6:43:20 GMT
It's the standard approach, Orbs, if you don't like the findings claim that the research is biased or invalid. Not at all it’s about what issues are important and need to be dealt with and the likes of this which for me is a very minor thing and on the grand scales unimportant. Picking on every discrepancy such as this will simply divide when we should be bringing people together. Maybe we should ask Troy Deeney if he’s offended by being described as powerful and fast before we look at this more. The important issues should be concentrated on. As per my previous post how do we resolve something like this gag the commentators or they’re just left to do the basics with no opinion through the fear of being accused of being racist. Anything ultimately if looked at could be deemed racist if you dig deep enough. In respect to the issue being discussed. What would you do to resolve it? Start telling the commentator to start describing Mata as strong and fast and Deeney as a finesse player.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 6:51:37 GMT
It's the standard approach, Orbs, if you don't like the findings claim that the research is biased or invalid. - 643 individual players from a total of more than 1500 - 20 Prem games of a total 760 - 80 games from a total of more than 2500 - No like for like comparison - Assumes all players are equal in every aspect other than skin tone - Does not consider individual player traits / positions - Could quite easily be comparing black defenders with white strikers for all we know You don't think that it could have been better? Or are you just accepting things blindly to suit your own view. None of us here are racist, and there is no reason for me to not like the findings (another pathetic insinuation on your part), but some of us look at things logically and with an open mind. We don't blindly follow the popular narrative and swallow whatever shit the media spins to us.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 6:57:20 GMT
So what your saying is that every time a black person is unhappy with the result of something whether it’s a job interview, bad decision in a game, advertising campaign that they can claim the decision is racialy motivated. As I said in the original post what would happen if the original issue was the other way around could they claim that was racist because more often they were deemed as weak and cumbersome. As a white person who goes to the gym could I claim to be unhappy that white people are depicted in that way. In relation to the findings how do you suggest they’re resolved the only way I see it is to have no commentry other than in highlights so that everything can be checked and vetted before going out. Commentary is a very distinctive thing and every commentator will be worried that they might say something that could offend so will keep it very simple and not giving opinion because they’ll be terrified what they say offend and they might lose their job. If this issue is addressed what’s to say that something else is raised a couple of months down the line say Burnley have less black players in there first team than any other PL team or why are there a low number of black club physios. Nope. Not saying that at all. It looks like you're falling into the trap of putting words in into other posters mouths. Just read the article - it's all in there.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jul 1, 2020 6:59:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jul 1, 2020 7:03:45 GMT
You obviously aren't reading what I've typed. It literally says 'For someone who accepts that racism does exist' It's pretty hard to discuss this if you aren't even understanding the basic of sentences and meanings. So your next bit of 'You've taken the patronising self righteous route of starting to insinuate others are racist when they don't agree with your sentiments.' is also totally inaccurate because as you can (hopefully) see now that's not what I said. It was you yesterday saying about putting words in other posters mouths - just like you've done there and 100% wrongly. Like I said you admit it exists (for clarity for you) and then constantly go out of you way to try and show that it doesn't. Your next line of: 'The sample size when put into perspective is inconsequential and gives totally inconclusive results, regardless of how relevant you try to spin it' - It was taken off the BBC website so I'm not trying to spin anything - just reading what it says in the article. Thee BBC obviously think it isn't inconsequential and gives inconclusive results otherwise they wouldn't have posted it. To be fair, I don't need to 'admit' that it exists because I've never denied that it exists. Do you 'admit' that it exists or just acknowledge it. Secondly, I don't go out of my way to prove otherwise. I simply don't consider every slight vs a black person as racism. I take things into perspective and think about things before blindly accepting them, which is more than can be said for yourself. and you also resort to petty insults and name calling which does you no favours.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 7:05:23 GMT
To be fair, I don't need to 'admit' that it exists because I've never denied that it exists. Do you 'admit' that it exists or just acknowledge it. Secondly, I don't go out of my way to prove otherwise. I simply don't consider every slight vs a black person as racism. I take things into perspective and think about things before blindly accepting them, which is more than can be said for yourself. and you also resort to petty insults and name calling which does you no favours. You started it.... poo poo head
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jul 1, 2020 7:08:19 GMT
'The Premier League says its Black Lives Matter campaign is to send the message that it is unacceptable to treat black people differently to anyone else - and not an endorsement of a political movement.' Seems fair enough.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jul 1, 2020 7:12:44 GMT
'The Premier League says its Black Lives Matter campaign is to send the message that it is unacceptable to treat black people differently to anyone else - and not an endorsement of a political movement.' Seems fair enough. Yes. A qualified support therefore for Black Lives Matter. Caused by Black Lives Matter UK political posturing. It’s a shame because there should be unequivocal support.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 7:24:01 GMT
'The Premier League says its Black Lives Matter campaign is to send the message that it is unacceptable to treat black people differently to anyone else - and not an endorsement of a political movement.' Seems fair enough. If that's true then why didn't the Prem just stick with 'kick it out' for the rest of the season, or another slogan that could even include 'black', but not BLM. I honestly think that they jumped the gun on this one and should have done a little research before going all in with BLM. Over the coming weeks you can be sure that BLM is going to get more and more scrutinised, especially when seeing videos of people smashing up police cars, rioting, vandalising and being violent in the name of BLM. I think it's as you've said earlier... you can't really pick and choose....when it comes to supporting and promoting a political movement.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 1, 2020 7:37:26 GMT
It's the standard approach, Orbs, if you don't like the findings claim that the research is biased or invalid. Not at all it’s about what issues are important and need to be dealt with and the likes of this which for me is a very minor thing and on the grand scales unimportant. Picking on every discrepancy such as this will simply divide when we should be bringing people together. Maybe we should ask Troy Deeney if he’s offended by being described as powerful and fast before we look at this more. The important issues should be concentrated on. As per my previous post how do we resolve something like this gag the commentators or they’re just left to do the basics with no opinion through the fear of being accused of being racist. Anything ultimately if looked at could be deemed racist if you dig deep enough. In respect to the issue being discussed. What would you do to resolve it? Start telling the commentator to start describing Mata as strong and fast and Deeney as a finesse player. It's exactly what happens on here on a regular basis. Recently, I've had posters claiming that all research is biased, that survey sizes were too small or unrepresentative (these were yougov surveys and peer-reviewed research!) and it's simply because people don't like the findings. To deal with the final point, Sky said last night they'd be looking into exactly how their commentators describe players and working with them to eradicate descriptions based around racial stereotyping. But as I've said before, the basis of all this is it you've lived your life in a world which is basically designed more or less for you, you just don't see the constant small, sly, ongoing racial issues that 'others' experience. It's not your fault, why would you care or even notice if it doesn't affect you. I've said previously i lived in Scotland for a decade. You'll no doubt dismiss it as being not serious, but as an Englishman I got to experience being an 'ethnic minority' for once, with all the regular and routine singling out for jokes and comments around English national character stereotyping etc. Most of the time it was just banter, especially in the football team i played for where I was the only Sassenach (which I did get called regularly along with English bastard!), but sometimes not and i can tell you it eventually gets just a little tiresome and certainly made me more considerate towards anyone who might stand out as different for whatever reason. I suspect this is precisely what BAME folk have to put up with, and much more, on a routine basis. Those who don't see it or experience of are probably the ones more inclined to trivialize or dismiss campaigns to tackle it.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jul 1, 2020 7:40:38 GMT
Again... Totally needless character assassination attempt, after what was a sensible post. Nothing to do with character assassination - He said 'We need to look at the serious cases.' By definition saying that some cases of racism are more serious than others. Just asking the question. By definition of the law some are more serious than others like murder and I'd rather we put all our effort into that than pursuing the manufacturers of COCO Pops. Nobody is saying it doesn't matter or exist you prioritise. Edit: but for your reassurance victims of hate crime get an "enhanced" level of service from the Police that others dont.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 7:43:37 GMT
Not at all it’s about what issues are important and need to be dealt with and the likes of this which for me is a very minor thing and on the grand scales unimportant. Picking on every discrepancy such as this will simply divide when we should be bringing people together. Maybe we should ask Troy Deeney if he’s offended by being described as powerful and fast before we look at this more. The important issues should be concentrated on. As per my previous post how do we resolve something like this gag the commentators or they’re just left to do the basics with no opinion through the fear of being accused of being racist. Anything ultimately if looked at could be deemed racist if you dig deep enough. In respect to the issue being discussed. What would you do to resolve it? Start telling the commentator to start describing Mata as strong and fast and Deeney as a finesse player. It's exactly what happens on here on a regular basis. Recently, I've had posters claiming that all research is biased, that survey sizes were too small or unrepresentative (these were yougov surveys and peer-reviewed research!) and it's simply because people don't like the findings. To deal with the final point, Sky said last night they'd be looking into exactly how their commentators describe players and working with them to eradicate descriptions based around racial stereotyping. But as I've said before, the basis of all this is it you've lived your life in a world which is basically designed more or less for you, you just don't see the constant small, sly, ongoing racial issues that 'others' experience. It's not your fault, why would you care or even notice if it doesn't affect you. I've said previously i lived in Scotland for a decade. You'll no doubt dismiss it as being not serious, but as an Englishman I got to experience being an 'ethnic minority' for once, with all the regular and routine singling out for jokes and comments around English national character stereotyping etc. Most of the time it was just banter, especially in the football team i played for where I was the only Sassenach (which I did get called regularly along with English bastard!), but sometimes not and i can tell you it eventually gets just a little tiresome and certainly made me more considerate towards anyone who might stand out as different for whatever reason. I suspect this is precisely what BAME folk have to put up with, and much more, on a routine basis. Those who don't see it or experience of are probably the ones more inclined to trivialize or dismiss campaigns to tackle it. Sorry, but that isn't a good an absolute bullshit comparison. Do you think people in the UK routinely make fun of BAME people and sing songs about them, or enjoy banter with them about their ethnicity. If BAME people got racist comments as much as people dish out banter then we'd be the most racist country on earth.
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jul 1, 2020 7:44:03 GMT
'The Premier League says its Black Lives Matter campaign is to send the message that it is unacceptable to treat black people differently to anyone else - and not an endorsement of a political movement.' Seems fair enough. If that's true then why didn't the Prem just stick with 'kick it out' for the rest of the season, or another slogan that could even include 'black', but not BLM. I honestly think that they jumped the gun on this one and should have done a little research before going all in with BLM. Over the coming weeks you can be sure that BLM is going to get more and more scrutinised, especially when seeing videos of people smashing up police cars, rioting, vandalising and being violent in the name of BLM. I think it's as you've said earlier... you can't really pick and choose....when it comes to supporting and promoting a political movement. Looks like a backtrack to me. They've linked themselves tightly with BLM thinking it's making a stand against racism (which it is) whilst maybe not realising the potential bigger picture of the movement.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 1, 2020 7:46:26 GMT
It's the standard approach, Orbs, if you don't like the findings claim that the research is biased or invalid. - 643 individual players from a total of more than 1500 - 20 Prem games of a total 760 - 80 games from a total of more than 2500 - No like for like comparison - Assumes all players are equal in every aspect other than skin tone - Does not consider individual player traits / positions - Could quite easily be comparing black defenders with white strikers for all we know You don't think that it could have been better? Or are you just accepting things blindly to suit your own view. None of us here are racist, and there is no reason for me to not like the findings (another pathetic insinuation on your part), but some of us look at things logically and with an open mind. We don't blindly follow the popular narrative and swallow whatever shit the media spins to us. For someone with such a great sense of humour, you seem remarkably prone to bouts of chippiness! I think the survey is a decent start. Obviously, you don't. But like I said, it is the standard response to dismiss the validity of the survey, as you've just done. Perhaps someone will come along with some better research and find otherwise. Until they do, this is a good start. You think no-one on here is racist? We'll have to agree to disagree on that one!
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 7:48:55 GMT
- 643 individual players from a total of more than 1500 - 20 Prem games of a total 760 - 80 games from a total of more than 2500 - No like for like comparison - Assumes all players are equal in every aspect other than skin tone - Does not consider individual player traits / positions - Could quite easily be comparing black defenders with white strikers for all we know You don't think that it could have been better? Or are you just accepting things blindly to suit your own view. None of us here are racist, and there is no reason for me to not like the findings (another pathetic insinuation on your part), but some of us look at things logically and with an open mind. We don't blindly follow the popular narrative and swallow whatever shit the media spins to us. For someone with such a great sense of humour, you seem remarkably prone to bouts of chippiness! I think the survey is a decent start. Obviously, you don't. But like I said, it is the standard response to dismiss the validity of the survey, as you've just done. Perhaps someone will come along with some better research and find otherwise. Until they do, this is a good start. You think no-one on here is racist? We'll have to agree to disagree on that one! Thank you.. and I meant those that were currently actively posting at that time. Of course I had to check first that Royland wasn't online.
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Jul 1, 2020 7:50:58 GMT
'The Premier League says its Black Lives Matter campaign is to send the message that it is unacceptable to treat black people differently to anyone else - and not an endorsement of a political movement.' Seems fair enough. Which is what I and a number of posters have been saying all along. That statement keeps it simple. Maybe they should look at taking BLM off there shirts and using a simple slogan that everyone can get behind like equality for all.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 1, 2020 7:51:08 GMT
It's exactly what happens on here on a regular basis. Recently, I've had posters claiming that all research is biased, that survey sizes were too small or unrepresentative (these were yougov surveys and peer-reviewed research!) and it's simply because people don't like the findings. To deal with the final point, Sky said last night they'd be looking into exactly how their commentators describe players and working with them to eradicate descriptions based around racial stereotyping. But as I've said before, the basis of all this is it you've lived your life in a world which is basically designed more or less for you, you just don't see the constant small, sly, ongoing racial issues that 'others' experience. It's not your fault, why would you care or even notice if it doesn't affect you. I've said previously i lived in Scotland for a decade. You'll no doubt dismiss it as being not serious, but as an Englishman I got to experience being an 'ethnic minority' for once, with all the regular and routine singling out for jokes and comments around English national character stereotyping etc. Most of the time it was just banter, especially in the football team i played for where I was the only Sassenach (which I did get called regularly along with English bastard!), but sometimes not and i can tell you it eventually gets just a little tiresome and certainly made me more considerate towards anyone who might stand out as different for whatever reason. I suspect this is precisely what BAME folk have to put up with, and much more, on a routine basis. Those who don't see it or experience of are probably the ones more inclined to trivialize or dismiss campaigns to tackle it. Sorry, but that is an absolute bullshit comparison. Do you think people in the UK routinely make fun of BAME people and sing songs about them, or enjoy banter with them about their ethnicity. If BAME people got racist comments as much as people dish out banter then we'd be the most racist country on earth. I figured you wouldn't be having it! The black guy in the team I played for was called Midnight. The Asian guy in the team I played for was called half past seven. Ten years ago. Banter. Maybe I was just unlucky to play in a spectacularly racist team! But times have no doubt moved on...
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 7:57:00 GMT
Sorry, but that is an absolute bullshit comparison. Do you think people in the UK routinely make fun of BAME people and sing songs about them, or enjoy banter with them about their ethnicity. If BAME people got racist comments as much as people dish out banter then we'd be the most racist country on earth. I figured you wouldn't be having it! The black guy in the team I played for was called Midnight. The Asian guy in the team I played for was called half past seven. Ten years ago. Banter. Maybe I was just unlucky to play in a spectacularly racist team! But times have no doubt moved on... My dad used to run a lot with a bald black guy who's nickname was 'Malteser head'. They all had nicknames like that. I'm not sure if that's racism or banter in that case, but no one was offended or bothered by it at the time. Obviously today you wouldn't get away with it. Remember when Gladiators was on TV and the captain was a black guy named 'Shadow'. Do you think that would be accepted today? Again, probably someone would be offended by it.
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jul 1, 2020 8:07:40 GMT
I figured you wouldn't be having it! The black guy in the team I played for was called Midnight. The Asian guy in the team I played for was called half past seven. Ten years ago. Banter. Maybe I was just unlucky to play in a spectacularly racist team! But times have no doubt moved on...
I don't get that one... plus it's a bit of a long nickname to shout out if you want the ball off him or he's got a man on!
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jul 1, 2020 8:10:51 GMT
I figured you wouldn't be having it! The black guy in the team I played for was called Midnight. The Asian guy in the team I played for was called half past seven. Ten years ago. Banter. Maybe I was just unlucky to play in a spectacularly racist team! But times have no doubt moved on... My dad used to run a lot with a bald black guy who's nickname was 'Malteser head'. They all had nicknames like that. I'm not sure if that's racism or banter in that case, but no one was offended or bothered by it at the time. Obviously today you wouldn't get away with it. Remember when Gladiators was on TV and the captain was a black guy named 'Shadow'. Do you think that would be accepted today? Again, probably someone would be offended by it. Let me help you out. It's racism if 'prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.' Note the word prejudice in that definition of racism.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 1, 2020 8:11:25 GMT
I figured you wouldn't be having it! The black guy in the team I played for was called Midnight. The Asian guy in the team I played for was called half past seven.Ten years ago. Banter. Maybe I was just unlucky to play in a spectacularly racist team! But times have no doubt moved on... I don't get that one... plus it's a bit of a long nickname to shout out if you want the ball off him or he's got a man on! Me neither... I would have thought 'quarter to three' or 'ten to two' would be more (or less) appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jul 1, 2020 8:27:50 GMT
I figured you wouldn't be having it! The black guy in the team I played for was called Midnight. The Asian guy in the team I played for was called half past seven.Ten years ago. Banter. Maybe I was just unlucky to play in a spectacularly racist team! But times have no doubt moved on... I don't get that one... plus it's a bit of a long nickname to shout out if you want the ball off him or he's got a man on! Me neither... I would have thought 'quarter to three' or 'ten to two' would be more (or less) appropriate. Your right Foz weve all got similar stories about mates, we had two Michael's in our group 30yrs ago and genuinely one was Black Mick the other White Mick when we were together. Now note not "black" Mick and Mick but "white" Mick.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 1, 2020 8:35:31 GMT
I figured you wouldn't be having it! The black guy in the team I played for was called Midnight. The Asian guy in the team I played for was called half past seven. Ten years ago. Banter. Maybe I was just unlucky to play in a spectacularly racist team! But times have no doubt moved on... My dad used to run a lot with a bald black guy who's nickname was 'Malteser head'. They all had nicknames like that. I'm not sure if that's racism or banter in that case, but no one was offended or bothered by it at the time. Obviously today you wouldn't get away with it. Remember when Gladiators was on TV and the captain was a black guy named 'Shadow'. Do you think that would be accepted today? Again, probably someone would be offended by it. Hmmm, so "obviously today you wouldn't get away with it". Which indicates that previously it was considered acceptable. By whom I wonder? And what led to it no longer being considered acceptable today? Once upon a time it was considered acceptable to use the terms nigger and coon, then coloured or negro or half caste, now black, white, mixed race. I suspect it was "someone getting offended by it" (probably those on the receiving end!) which led to those original terms changing to something considered acceptable. Which is basically what's going on again now in various forms, people trying to change the world to remove forms of discrimination and reminders of it, although I accept that the waters are muddied somewhat by the political aspirations of some of those behind the BLM movement.
|
|
|
Post by Orbs on Jul 1, 2020 8:42:20 GMT
Me neither... I would have thought 'quarter to three' or 'ten to two' would be more (or less) appropriate. Your right Foz weve all got similar stories about mates, we had two Michael's in our group 30yrs ago and genuinely one was Black Mick the other White Mick when we were together. Now note not "black" Mick and Mick but "white" Mick. I'd definitely say 'less appropriate.'
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jul 1, 2020 9:01:37 GMT
Me neither... I would have thought 'quarter to three' or 'ten to two' would be more (or less) appropriate. Your right Foz weve all got similar stories about mates, we had two Michael's in our group 30yrs ago and genuinely one was Black Mick the other White Mick when we were together. Now note not "black" Mick and Mick but "white" Mick. About that time (30 years ago) we had a black Chief Stoker on one ship I was on who was a right twat to his lads, they called him "Bob" behind his back, the O stood for "Orrible" and the second B questioned his parentage. Someone in our mess new to the ship had only heard him being talked about as Bob, said bloke came in the mess complaining how ignorant the chief stoker was cos he'd been ignored when trying to get his attention by shouting his "name" all down the passageway
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Jul 1, 2020 9:22:04 GMT
Concepts like white privilege promote a victim mentality and it should be obvious to anyone with a bit of sense as to why that’s not a good thing.
Racism absolutely still exists but when you’ve got people claiming that because 4 out of 5 people wanted to go to a pub to discuss things but the other didn’t that’s somehow systemic racism then it’s clear to me that the waters have become muddied somewhere.
In order to be able to fix whatever needs fixing we need to be able to accurately identify the issues with a nuanced discussion but as a society we’re failing on this front at the moment.
|
|