Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[the fox]

1 hour ago, Richard said:

Positive discrimination in favour of non-white males is needed because throughout everyday life white men gain numerous small advantages (so-called white privilege/male privilege) compared to others. An example would be not being immediately judged by someone based on your appearance like a woman may, or having someone assume you are in a position of inferiority because of your gender or ethnicity. I think it’s often very difficult to notice these things as a white man (myself included) because you aren’t used to such everyday discrimination. 

 

Anyway ironically I actually came in this thread to say that Thierry Henry is a vastly overrated pundit who rarely says anything of worth

What is it with white people and their "white guilt"? Is discriminating against your own race supposed to be a compensation to the minorities who been affected by the acts of someone else? What happened happened. Now we move on.

 

Just let the most qualified person get the job. 

Edited 3 March 2018 by the fox

[Strokes]

Positive discrimination is just tokenism and is just as bad as any discrimination. 

[RobHawk]

It depends on what you class as positive discrimination. In my mind it's where to people are interviewed and judged to be equally competent, so the difference in race can be used as the decision maker. So 2 people score 20/30 at interview, one is white, one is black, then the job is given rot the black person as they are underrepresented in the organisation. That I'm ok with.

 

Things like the Rooney rule are bollocks though.

[Buce]

9 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

It depends on what you class as positive discrimination. In my mind it's where to people are interviewed and judged to be equally competent, so the difference in race can be used as the decision maker. So 2 people score 20/30 at interview, one is white, one is black, then the job is given rot the black person as they are underrepresented in the organisation. That I'm ok with.

3

 

I think that is absolute bollox.

 

Reverse racism in all its glory.

Edited 3 March 2018 by Buce

[The Doctor]

4 hours ago, ajthefox said:

This seems to be forgotten a lot of the time when it comes to women in football.

 

A woman who makes a mistake will often incur criticism for all women (see above) which is just bollocks really. No-one is suggesting Garth Crooks or any of the other number of shit pundits or commentators are shit because of their penis are they? They're just shite.

Garth Crooks is shit because he's a penis, does that count?

[Richard]

4 hours ago, the fox said:

What is it with white people and their "white guilt"? Is discriminating against your own race supposed to be a compensation to the minorities who been affected by the acts of someone else? What happened happened. Now we move on.

 

Just let the most qualified person get the job. 

I wasn’t particularly thinking about jobs more about a society which is systemically biased towards heterosexual white males. Whether positive discrimination (or negative discrimination against aforementioned) would counteract that I don’t know 

[RobHawk]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

I think that is absolute bollox.

 

Reverse racism in all its glory.

I Don't think so. The police are a good example.

 

theres a constabulary, who oversee an area which is roughly 50/50 white and black, or male and female or whatever you want it to be. The problem is the officers upholding the law in this area are 90% white. 

 

Surely if if you have 2 candidates identical in competency, they are literally neck and neck. You need something to split them if there only 1 job. Surely it's better to use a characteristic that ensures the force is more representative of those it protects, than just to base it on the whim of who seemed more like a laugh (for example). The best person still gets the job. 

 

The Rooney rule is an issue. Saying you have to have a certain percentage of women/blacks etc means you don't always get the best person for the job.

[the fox]

54 minutes ago, Richard said:

I wasn’t particularly thinking about jobs more about a society

 

which is systemically biased towards heterosexual white males. Whether positive discrimination (or negative discrimination against aforementioned) would counteract that I don’t know 

That is worse! You are calling for white men to be discriminated against not only professionally but in most if not all aspects of life.

 

How is it systematically biased towards, not only white men, but straight white men? Pls tell me how gay white men are discriminated against? Do they have "sex orientation" box to fill in their job application? Or do they want to act all "sweet" and be considered professional? In the world of "heterosexual " men, that's called sexual harassment and it will lead to you losing your job. You are there to work so act professionally. If you give me 2 pictures of a gay and a straight man with a suit on acting professionally, i will not be able to tell the difference.

 

If you bring two normal people and dress them the same and give them the same resume, no matter the color of their skin. How can they be discriminated against in most cases? Don't have a face tattoo or let your "homies" drop you off for a work meating and you will be treated the same (I'm not saying that there are not people who discriminate, not at all).

 

Discrimination is Discrimination! I blame the media and the shitheads on social media for guilt tripping the "white devil" every moment of everyday! White males should just wear a shirt with "I'm sorry for eveything that happened in this world" writing on it And get over with it.

 

Believe it or not, white males are a victim of guilt shaming and there are many white males who are chanting "yeah, discriminate against us" and making it worse for everyone.

 

I don't know why i'm getting so heated about this and i'm not even white maybe i have low tolerance for nonsense 

 

Edited 3 March 2018 by the fox

[the fox]

more to the point of "white shaming". why are most people allowed to say "i'm proud to be [insert another race here]" but a white male is looked at sideways when  he says "i'm proud to be white"?

[the fox]

2 hours ago, RobHawk said:

It depends on what you class as positive discrimination. In my mind it's where to people are interviewed and judged to be equally competent, so the difference in race can be used as the decision maker. So 2 people score 20/30 at interview, one is white, one is black, then the job is given rot the black person as they are underrepresented in the organisation. That I'm ok with.

 

Things like the Rooney rule are bollocks though.

"Hey, to show you that we don't discriminate, we will give the job to the black guy instead of the white guy because of his skin color"

See how dumb that sounds? And what kind of company interviews just 2 people.

2 Wrongs don't make a right. If they get the same ratings, see the resume and record and make your decision.

[the fox]

2 hours ago, Buce said:

 

Reverse racism in all its glory.

There is no such thing as reverse racism. Racism is Racism 

Edited 3 March 2018 by the fox

[the fox]

28 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

I Don't think so. The police are a good example.

 

theres a constabulary, who oversee an area which is roughly 50/50 white and black, or male and female or whatever you want it to be. The problem is the officers upholding the law in this area are 90% white. 

 

Surely if if you have 2 candidates identical in competency, they are literally neck and neck. You need something to split them if there only 1 job. Surely it's better to use a characteristic that ensures the force is more representative of those it protects, than just to base it on the whim of who seemed more like a laugh (for example). The best person still gets the job. 

 

The Rooney rule is an issue. Saying you have to have a certain percentage of women/blacks etc means you don't always get the best person for the job.

Maybe, just maybe black people aren't really signing up to be police. did you give that a thought? 

[Rogstanley]

@the fox if you really need it to be explained to you how gay people have faced discrimination, then you must be an ostrich. Your head must be in the sand.

 

Anyone can look at positive discrimination and point out the flaws. That’s easy, it’s always easy to criticise. What’s more difficult is coming up with workable solutions.

 

We have problems with under-representation, some parts of society feel their options in life are limited. Not only does that reduce the size of the talent pool but also threatens the fabric of society. 

 

It’s never been about “white guilt” or any of that nonsense to me. I couldn’t give a toss about race politics, I think most people who engage in that kind of topic often come across as a bit pathetic. But I do want to live in a society which offers equality of opportunity because I think ultimately that will make it better for everyone, including myself.

Edited 4 March 2018 by Rogstanley

[Buce]

8 hours ago, RobHawk said:

I Don't think so. The police are a good example.

 

theres a constabulary, who oversee an area which is roughly 50/50 white and black, or male and female or whatever you want it to be. The problem is the officers upholding the law in this area are 90% white. 

 

Surely if if you have 2 candidates identical in competency, they are literally neck and neck. You need something to split them if there only 1 job. Surely it's better to use a characteristic that ensures the force is more representative of those it protects, than just to base it on the whim of who seemed more like a laugh (for example). The best person still gets the job. 

 

The Rooney rule is an issue. Saying you have to have a certain percentage of women/blacks etc means you don't always get the best person for the job.

 

I get where you're coming from, Rob, particularly with the example that you gave, but I don't like the precedent that it sets. Discriminating by skin colour (even with the best intentions) is always going to be wrong in my book. I hope that the day will come where people aren't defined by their skin colour, but I don't think that discriminating in favour of one does anything to bring that day nearer.

 

 

[Buce]

8 hours ago, the fox said:

There is no such thing as reverse racism. Racism is Racism 

 

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/reverse_racism

[The Doctor]

9 hours ago, the fox said:

more to the point of "white shaming". why are most people allowed to say "i'm proud to be [insert another race here]" but a white male is looked at sideways when  he says "i'm proud to be white"?

Because typically people who say they're proud to be white are a bit Klan-y and act as if not being white is a character failing.

[Colourmy]

4 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Because typically people who say they're proud to be white are a bit Klan-y and act as if not being white is a character failing.

I'm very proud to be white and I'm not Klan-y. I'm just proud of who I am and I'm proud of my heritage. 

I hope anyone is proud of their colour too and equally as proud of who they are and their heritage.

[Phube]

I’ve never really understood how you can be proud of anything you had no choice in; race, sexuality, place of birth etc.

 

Surely you can only be proud of something you have achieved or helped to achieve I.e. your own work or something your child does? 

Edited 4 March 2018 by Phube

[Colourmy]

22 minutes ago, Phube said:

I’ve never really understood how you can be proud of anything you had no choice in. Race, sexuality, place of birth.

 

Surely you can only be proud of something you have achieved or helped to achieve I.e. your own work or something your child does? 

And this is where people start getting daft isn't it? 

I can be as proud of my ancestry as you can about passing your Social Studies degree at De Mont Uni, or what Rubin achieved at pre-school.

Edit to add: I'm sure you were proud of Leicester winning the title, particularly when elsewhere and people would want to talk about it if they knew you were a supporter.  I was, but I don't consider my attendance that year influenced that success, so I wasn't involved in that either.

Edited 4 March 2018 by Colourmy

[The Doctor]

7 minutes ago, Colourmy said:

I'm very proud to be white and I'm not Klan-y. I'm just proud of who I am and I'm proud of my heritage. 

I hope anyone is proud of their colour too and equally as proud of who they are and their heritage.

Have you ever met anyone is this country who talked about how proud they were to be white and didn't turn out to be a BNP type? I've certainly not, and it doesn't really seem to be the done thing here.

[Colourmy]

18 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Have you ever met anyone is this country who talked about how proud they were to be white and didn't turn out to be a BNP type? I've certainly not, and it doesn't really seem to be the done thing here.

I've come across many people who are proud to be white, British and aren't National Front subscribers. 

It wasn't that long ago that the white British were held in high esteem for their stiff upper lip and never give in attitude. This has been sucked out of people over the last 40 years though and is deemed offensive to have that air about you. Tragic really.

 

To be or do anything now is offensive to someone, somewhere and making that stop is all the majority of this country want now.

Edited 4 March 2018 by Colourmy

[Phube]

32 minutes ago, Colourmy said:

And this is where people start getting daft isn't it? 

I can be as proud of my ancestry as you can about passing your Social Studies degree at De Mont Uni, or what Rubin achieved at pre-school.

Edit to add: I'm sure you were proud of Leicester winning the title, particularly when elsewhere and people would want to talk about it if they knew you were a supporter.  I was, but I don't consider my attendance that year influenced that success, so I wasn't involved in that either.

Quite, I wasn’t proud as I had nothing to do with it. I was happy, extatic, over the moon, amazed, overjoyed, shocked... but not proud.

If it was born just 30 miles further away, it would have just been a casual observer...

[Wymsey]

Cats and dogs are sometimes preferred to some people at times.

[The Doctor]

1 hour ago, Colourmy said:

I've come across many people who are proud to be white, British and aren't National Front subscribers. 

It wasn't that long ago that the white British were held in high esteem for their stiff upper lip and never give in attitude. This has been sucked out of people over the last 40 years though and is deemed offensive to have that air about you. Tragic really.

 

To be or do anything now is offensive to someone, somewhere and making that stop is all the majority of this country want now.

What a load of utter tripe. Literally no one considers the stiff upper lip to be offensive, just arguably stupid when it becomes isolating yourself and not getting help when you need it.

[bovril]

3 hours ago, Phube said:

I’ve never really understood how you can be proud of anything you had no choice in; race, sexuality, place of birth etc.

 

Surely you can only be proud of something you have achieved or helped to achieve I.e. your own work or something your child does? 

Well at least place of birth is concrete. But race doesn't even really exist. 'White' is a merely a skin colour (and not even a very accurate description). How anyone can be proud of that is beyond me.