Should our next manager be BAME/LGBT?

[Pompeyowl]

4 hours ago, McRightSide said:

I'm loving - yet some how find it depressing - that the people arguing against me are just proving my point further.

 

Shows the problem really.

 

To think that white people don't have privilege is pretty astounding, but I guess privilege is blind to those who have it.

 

 

 

 

I'm white, and wouldn't have taken many steps forward there. 

 

Am I still privileged because of my skin colour?

 

Or am I still ignorant?

[Guest Grez Bez]

Superb video that

 

@Pompeyowl Obviosuly nobody is saying it applies to everyone!

 

[Guest Grez Bez]

Just to clarify

 

I'm totally against positive discrimination as are most black people I know.

 

It's all about education for me...

[McRightSide]

4 minutes ago, LSOwls said:

Superb video that

 

@Pompeyowl Obviosuly nobody is saying it applies to everyone!

 

 

Indeed

[McRightSide]

14 minutes ago, Pompeyowl said:

 

 

I'm white, and wouldn't have taken many steps forward there. 

 

Am I still privileged because of my skin colour?

 

Or am I still ignorant?

 

It means there are some people that are more privileged that you.

 

But this isn't about individuals, it's bigger than you.

[McRightSide]

54 minutes ago, Big Ron's Sovereign said:

 

That video is utter sh!t. It's generally loaded with questions about being involved in a family unit. Has nothing to do with colour at all. 

I don't look at another person and think I'm better than them, what their background is and what their colour is. It does not make any difference how I treat them. I treat people how I expect to be treated, with respect. 

The video above shows more ignorance than it tries to dispel 

 

Family, education, finance

 

[Pompeyowl]

11 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

 

It means there are some people that are more privileged that you.

 

But this isn't about individuals, it's bigger than you.

 

 

What about the years of 'positive discrimination', where many people that were probably better for a job were being knocked back for being straight white males?

 

Who was privileged then?

[Big Ron's Sovereign]

10 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

 

Family, education, finance

 

 

Is that strictly limited to white people then? 

[McRightSide]

2 minutes ago, Big Ron's Sovereign said:

 

Is that strictly limited to white people then? 

No. See my reply to PompeyOwl

 

I always find it interesting how angrymad white people get when you dare to suggest they are generally more fortunate than others.

[Halifax Owls]

OMG.....I feel soooooo marginalised, I'm off to my safe space (flounce)

[Big Ron's Sovereign]

11 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

No. See my reply to PompeyOwl

 

I always find it interesting how angrymad white people get when you dare to suggest they are generally more fortunate than others.

 

I've just seen your reply to Pompey Owl, You're nothing but contradiction. Some black people are more privileged than white, so wher does that stand in your argument?

 

Your response to me is bizarre too, nobody is getting "angrymad", you are being questioned on your ridiculous statements and when questioned you counteract by accusations of racism.

 

 

 

 

[Jon Newsome]

22 minutes ago, Pompeyowl said:

 

 

What about the years of 'positive discrimination', where many people that were probably better for a job were being knocked back for being straight white males?

 

Who was privileged then?

 

Too right, I work for a company that has this policy.

[McRightSide]

21 minutes ago, Big Ron's Sovereign said:

 

I've just seen your reply to Pompey Owl, You're nothing but contradiction. Some black people are more privileged than white, so wher does that stand in your argument?

 

Your response to me is bizarre too, nobody is getting "angrymad", you are being questioned on your ridiculous statements and when questioned you counteract by accusations of racism.

 

 

 

 

 

So you think on the whole that white people aren't more privileged than black ones?

 

Ok then.

 

This isn't about individuals. Not sure why that's so hard to understand.

 

I haven't accused anyone of being racist.

 

angrymad is referring to the way a load of you are getting really emotional when suggesting that in general black people don't have as good a shot as white people.

 

[McRightSide]

44 minutes ago, Pompeyowl said:

 

 

What about the years of 'positive discrimination', where many people that were probably better for a job were being knocked back for being straight white males?

 

Who was privileged then?

 

read my post about leveling the playing field.

 

it's not about individuals.

 

and anyway, who knows who could have been the best person for that job? different people would tackle it in different ways and have different levels of success. 

[Pompeyowl]

9 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

 

read my post about leveling the playing field.

 

it's not about individuals.

 

and anyway, who knows who could have been the best person for that job? different people would tackle it in different ways and have different levels of success. 

 

 

Now you're just making excuses because the morality of your agenda is being challeneged. 

 

If a straight white male that is already trained for a job doesn't get the job in favour of someone that isn't equally trained, but is either trans gender, gay, or from another ethnic background, how is that a good thing? That's completely against all that we've been working so long to avoid. 

 

But it's only discriminating against straight white males, so that's ok, right?

[steveger]

2 minutes ago, Pompeyowl said:

 

 

Now you're just making excuses because the morality of your agenda is being challeneged. 

 

If a straight white male that is already trained for a job doesn't get the job in favour of someone that isn't equally trained, but is either trans gender, gay, or from another ethnic background, how is that a good thing? That's completely against all that we've been working so long to avoid. 

 

But it's only discriminating against straight white males, so that's ok, right?

Bang on mate, some of our resident OTT lefties (not necessarily this particular poster) are barking mad

[Pompeyowl]

2 minutes ago, steveger said:

Bang on mate, some of our resident OTT lefties (not necessarily this particular poster) are barking mad

 

Many of them would also swear blind that positive discrimination has never happened. 

 

I'm 100% for equality for every person, but there's a LOT of fact picking and overlooking in order to suit an agenda. 

[McRightSide]

31 minutes ago, Pompeyowl said:

 

 

Now you're just making excuses because the morality of your agenda is being challeneged. 

 

If a straight white male that is already trained for a job doesn't get the job in favour of someone that isn't equally trained, but is either trans gender, gay, or from another ethnic background, how is that a good thing? That's completely against all that we've been working so long to avoid. 

 

But it's only discriminating against straight white males, so that's ok, right?

 

I don't think you really get into a debate on the number of times white people have missed out on this vs the amount of times black people have.

 

I was very clear that the person who gets a job should be the best person for it. But what you're not appreciating is that it's proven the more diverse and organization is, the better they perform because they are more creative. Who's to say hiring another a minority candidate won't unlock creativity that was otherwise not possible.

 

The point of these programmes is to remove barriers and sometimes the issue needs to be forced with quotas - its down to the hiring company to find minority candidates that stack up...and there isn't enough for them to choose from. But if you don't grant people the opportunities in the first place sometimes with drastic action, then your never going to make a significant change.

 

[Big Ron's Sovereign]

11 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

 

I don't think you really get into a debate on the number of times white people have missed out on this vs the amount of times black people have.

 

I was very clear that the person who gets a job should be the best person for it. But what you're not appreciating is that it's proven the more diverse and organization is, the better they perform because they are more creative. Who's to say hiring another a minority candidate won't unlock creativity that was otherwise not possible.

 

The point of these programmes is to remove barriers and sometimes the issue needs to be forced with quotas - its down to the hiring company to find minority candidates that stack up...and there isn't enough for them to choose from. But if you don't grant people the opportunities in the first place sometimes with drastic action, then your never going to make a significant change.

 

 

The only one that has discriminated is yourself. It appears you would quite clearly give a job to a non white purely because "white are more privileged" even though you know nothing of the white mans background. 

 

[McRightSide]

4 minutes ago, Big Ron's Sovereign said:

 

The only one that has discriminated is yourself. It appears you would quite clearly give a job to a non white purely because "white are more privileged" even though you know nothing of the white mans background. 

 

 

Err apart from where I said jobs should go to the best person