What is equality to you?

[Cyclone]

14 hours ago, danot said:

Whites who abuse none whites are colour prejudice, not racist.

And believe me, there are plenty of none whites who are colour prejudice.  Now, racism, that's way more complex.

You're talking nonsense.

[Cyclone]

16 hours ago, Waldo said:

@Cyclone

 

Well, still waiting to have the points I raised in #240 addressed....

 

If it's about helping those how lack privilege, why don't we quantify what privilege is, and have schemes designed specifically to help those INDIVIDUALS who lack it?

 

Rather that the assumption that because, say black folk, experience more general predjudice in life we should be running initiatives to get all black people in to work (some of whom may well be far more privileged than some white folk, who will not qualify for such schemes because they're unfortunately white).

 

Doing it that way is innately unfair. You need to assess people on an individual basis, because that's what we are. individuals.

Positive action is about addressing an imbalance in an organisations.  It's not about giving targeted help to individuals, it's not up to any organisation to try to improve the lot of an individual.  Central government has to address fundamental drivers of disadvantage.

What PA can do though is help to ensure that an organisation is representative of the community it represents.

 

Re: central government, the tories see being poor (or not rich) as a personal failing, they don't recognise the privilege of a wealthy background, and so they are hugely disinclined to do anything to help the poor.  They'd much rather try to pass it off as a failure of character and then do something to help the rich instead, who they perceive as being better people (it's just a coincidence that many of the tories are themselves rich and from privileged rich backgrounds).

18 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Or you could just admit you were wrong.

Or you could continue to grasp at semantic straws in order to try to score a point.

[danot]

5 hours ago, Cyclone said:

You're talking nonsense.

Care to explain why that is?

 

No? Thought as much. 

Edited March 4, 2019 by danot

[El Cid]

A work colleague just wrote - " Can we have a team building weekend, just ladies lol".

[Baron99]

14 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

I've heard the term before. It's just another negative connotation to being male. Part of a wider campaign. There's toxic femininity out there too.

 

Also, why did a woman write the play about the pressures of being a man? She has no first hand experience. Unless she self identified as a male for a few weeks whilst writing it. Otherwise it's just cultural appropriation. There's another loathsome leftist term.

 

Speaking of equality, I see Will Smith has blued himself up for the new Aladdin film. Talk about racist. Why couldn't they have given the role to a blue skinned actor? He's denying a blue actor of a role.

Somewhere there's a Smurf with a grievance. 

[Branyy]

23 minutes ago, El Cid said:

A work colleague just wrote - " Can we have a team building weekend, just ladies lol".

1. Identify as a lady

2. Join a team building weekend

3. ???

4. Profit

[Baron99]

Read at the weekend that a new transgender unit has opened in a women's prison in the London area.  I'm guessing Holloway? 

 

It's for men transitioning to women but they won't be allowed into the women's prison at any stage. 

[danot]

35 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

Read at the weekend that a new transgender unit has opened in a women's prison in the London area.  I'm guessing Holloway? 

 

It's for men transitioning to women but they won't be allowed into the women's prison at any stage. 

Why would women need to be segregated from transgender women, did it say? 

[Cyclone]

10 hours ago, danot said:

Care to explain why that is?

 

No? Thought as much. 

Well, it's the way that everything you said was complete and utter nonsense.  I can't prove negatives of course, but just because you make some nonsense up and waste the time to write it down, don't expect anyone to see it as anything other than nonsense.

[danot]

Just now, Cyclone said:

Well, it's the way that everything you said was complete and utter nonsense.  I can't prove negatives of course, but just because you make some nonsense up and waste the time to write it down, don't expect anyone to see it as anything other than nonsense.

 Negative? What negative is that then?

 And I'm still waiting for you to explain 'why' it's 'nonsense'. Calling it nonesense without specifying what makes it nonesense seens a little under par for you Cyclone.  Has it been a long day?