The BBC again: ‘No whites need apply’

Gradius

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So the 10%—30% representation of women in politics is something that we don't need to fix?

"Fix"

What about deep sea mining? Are 50% of those people women?

Is there a representative racial representation amongst deep sea miners?

If people want a thing, they will eventually get it, even over large amounts of time. If they don't, maybe they didn't want it after such a long time. Remove barriers, don't replace them with different artificial barriers.

Attempting to artificially "fix" things at light speed based on childish ideas of sheer whole numbers is this skit in action...you'll end up with nothing good in the end

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mdwAkWvWMw

titan18

km991148 wrote: »

So, I'm still struggling to see what the issue is here.

Positive discrimination is still illegal in the UK.

We have a non profit that works within the creative industries that creates some opportunities and internships for people from under represented communities this is not only for non white people as white people from poor backgrounds can also apply. They accept pretty much everyone except rich white kids in these roles.

Only one such role is currently open in the BBC.

A lot of the roles advertised don't even have this restriction.

As usual, the Daily Mail has resorted to half baked reporting to get a rise out of the usual suspects - and what for? To push the anti BBC agenda. Is that worth more division?
I honestly don't understand how you would not be annoyed at being fed this crap.

Everyone needs to calm the fu(k down and stop being spoon fed and ready to be outraged.

Positive discrimination is technically illegal in the UK but there are specific circumstances where you can do it. They call it "positive action" but it's pretty much the same thing imo.

km991148

km991148 wrote: »

There's a lot of outrage here. What's the problem? A non profit giving a few roles to underrepresented communities? Trying to correct the imbalances of those that can buy their way into the industry. It's not even got much to do with race, yet we've came to page 20odd arguing over skin colour because most people took the Daily Mail at their word.

And if it's being pushed almost exclusively by the left side if the spectrum, then why are the Daily Mail themselves actively engaging in the same sort of programmes? More speculation perhaps?

I've not seen any outrage. Maybe we read things differently. I see discussion, you see outrage.

The DM is not promoting them, and even if it was, one right wing paper doesn't negate my point.

suicide_circus

The white savior impulse is strong. So strong that it leads otherwise good people to countenance obscenities.

km991148

titan18 wrote: »

Positive discrimination is technically illegal in the UK but there are specific circumstances where you can do it. They call it "positive action" but it's pretty much the same thing imo.

I know what this charity means by positive action. It's not what most people on this thread think it means (it's nothing to do with race exclusively)

What about the obvious clickbait of an article this is? No one seems to care about that.

km991148

Hhhhh wrote: »

The DM is not promoting them, and even if it was, one right wing paper doesn't negate my point.

Do the 'Stephen Lawrence Scholarship in Journalism, DMGT' is different type of policy?

What was your point, that's it's almost exclusively left wing? Funny how this was omitted in the article, why is that? Because the article was just another pathetic attack on the BBC to further the agendas of the DM and the old rich club at the top.


But no let's all talk about how there is racism against whites or some other bollocks.


Edit: it's actually laughable.. the BBC role reported didn't exclude white people, they also included anyone from a poor socio-economic background... The DM explicitly ask for "black, Asian or minority ethnic background"...

km991148

km991148 wrote: »

Do the 'Stephen Lawrence Scholarship in Journalism, DMGT' is different type of policy?

What was your point, that's it's almost exclusively left wing? Funny how this was omitted in the article, why is that? Because the article was just another pathetic attack on the BBC to further the agendas of the DM and the old rich club at the top.


But no let's all talk about how there is racism against whites or some other bollocks.

Yes almost exclusively. You have not shown that to be untrue. Funny how you view racism to be bollocks though, once it's perpetrated on those who are white.

Sweetemotion

km991148 wrote: »

Do the 'Stephen Lawrence Scholarship in Journalism, DMGT' is different type of policy?

What was your point, that's it's almost exclusively left wing? Funny how this was omitted in the article, why is that? Because the article was just another pathetic attack on the BBC to further the agendas of the DM and the old rich club at the top.


But no let's all talk about how there is racism against whites or some other bollocks.

You seem outraged.

km991148

Sweetemotion wrote: »

You seem outraged.

:pac:

nah just find the whole thing funny. The usual voices getting all triggered over a Daily Mail article.

km991148

Hhhhh wrote: »

. Funny how you view racism to be bollocks though, once it's perpetrated on those who are white.

No, I find the notion that there is such a thing as bollocks (in the original article).

suicide_circus

"How dare you question our righteous racism!"

km991148

km991148 wrote: »

No, I find the notion that there is such a thing as bollocks.

You find the notion of racism against white people to be bollocks? Deary, deary me. That's even worse.

suicide_circus

km991148 wrote: »

No, I find the notion that there is such a thing as bollocks.

Ah one of those people who believes racism can only be suffered by the poor simple brown people

I think certain posters true colors are coming out. One who denies the existence of racism happening to white people and another who is opposed to treating people equally. Maybe boards is a cesspit after all!

km991148

Hhhhh wrote: »

You find the notion of racism against white people to be bollocks? Deary, deary me. That's even worse.

Where in the UK is there white racism.

km991148

suicide_circus wrote: »

Ah one of those people who believes racism can only be suffered by the poor simple brown people

Of course racism can be suffered by anyone, I didn't say otherwise.

I just said I see little evidence of it in the UK, especially from the clickbait that was posted in the opening post.

I can believe people fall for it, it's like no one is even capable of checking basic facts.

AndrewJRenko

Gradius wrote: »

It doesn't embolden the far right, it creates it.

Were there many positive action programmes in Germany in the 1930s?

AndrewJRenko

Gradius wrote: »

"Fix"

What about deep sea mining? Are 50% of those people women?

Is there a representative racial representation amongst deep sea miners?

If people want a thing, they will eventually get it, even over large amounts of time. If they don't, maybe they didn't want it after such a long time. Remove barriers, don't replace them with different artificial barriers.

Attempting to artificially "fix" things at light speed based on childish ideas of sheer whole numbers is this skit in action...you'll end up with nothing good in the end

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mdwAkWvWMw

Is it really that upsetting for you to see people getting fair access to employment?

km991148

km991148 wrote: »

Where in the UK is there white racism.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk/2006/oct/22/ukcrime.race

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kriss_Donald

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Ross_Parker

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Richard_Everitt

Personally, I find your views to be pathetic in the extreme.

suicide_circus

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Is it really that upsetting for you to see people getting fair access to employment?

Fair access at the expense of other innocent parties is not fair access. Non whites dont need your charity.

AndrewJRenko

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Have women not got a vote?

Not in the Dail in proportion to the representation in the population, they don't.

But they did vote for the parties who brought in these measures, so that's democracy in action.

titan18

km991148 wrote: »

Where in the UK is there white racism.

Tbf whether it's racism or not, white people from poor backgrounds (think of all the old coal mining towns or northern areas) have more in common with minority groups disadvantaged against them they do with white people going to Oxbridge or old money English. Policies like the BBCs one actually disadvantage even more those people as the white roles will go to the usual crowd anyway and they won't be eligible for the minority roles. It's not like the poorer English or Eastern Europeans coming in to work jobs the English don't want are privileged here.

AndrewJRenko

suicide_circus wrote: »

Fair access at the expense of other innocent parties is not fair access. Non whites dont need your charity.

What's that line again about how any rebalancing feels like an attack on the privileged?

km991148

km991148 wrote: »

Of course racism can be suffered by anyone, I didn't say otherwise.

I just said I see little evidence of it in the UK, especially from the clickbait that was posted in the opening post.

I can believe people fall for it, it's like no one is even capable of checking basic facts.

Checking facts? The person who says that racism against white people (now changed to just the UK) is bollocks. Couldn't make it up! You weren't even smart enough to say it's rare, but in general, the concept of it is 'bollocks'.

suicide_circus

The poor were abandoned in favour of minorities when they failed to play ball on radical social issues.

AndrewJRenko

suicide_circus wrote: »

Enormous progress

The ongoing low representation of women in political roles here suggests that you need to rethink "enormous".

suicide_circus

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's that line again about how any rebalancing feels like an attack on the privileged?

Yeah poor whites all over europe are rolling in privileged.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The ongoing low representation of women in political roles here suggests that you need to rethink "enormous".

Women can put themselves forward. They tend not to. In fact, in general, people tend not to. Women just more so. Hence their low representation.

km991148

Hhhhh wrote: »

Personally, I find your views to be pathetic in the extreme.

I find those pathetically transparent attempts to stir the **** (as in the daily mail) pathetic in the extreme.

suicide_circus

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The ongoing low representation of women in political roles here suggests that you need to rethink "enormous".

How abouts you tell women to up their game and peruse careers you think they should