Yeah, racism to fix racism. Great idea.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Is this allowed?
- Thread starter Daddies_Sauce
- Start date
Yeah, racism to fix racism. Great idea.
You display a deep misunderstanding of the issues in play here.
I think not. You are advocating advantages being given to people based purely on the colour of skin. If that is not the definition of racism please tell me what is.
The aim is equality. Equality is achieved not by treating everybody the same but by making sure everyone can achieve the same results. It's a bigger picture. You can't see it.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,332
its (positive) discrimination. dont confuse with racism which is the belief of superiority/inferiority, or at least differences, based on race. (as apposed to difference based on culture and history, though many will confuse that too).
and that is screwed up definition that leads to screwed up conclusions. Equality is absolutely about treating people the same, giving the same chance and opportunity. you can force people to achieve the same result.
Equality is not achieved by treating everyone the same......? How can that be equality? And why should everyone be able to achieve the same results?
What you are after is equality of outcome. I want equality of opportunity. Very different things.
You haven't done any equality training lately have you?
I have literally this week finished an equality and diversity course, passing with a score of 100% and wether you agree or not, that is the current accepted framework of equality. And as a point of fact, it's not a definition of equality it's a model of how to achieve it. A definition is something else entirely.
Discrimination is discrimination no matter if it's described as positive or not. Giving advantage to someone because of the colour of skin is racism. Belief has nothing to do with it in my eyes. If you promote one group of people by its definition you are putting another group of people at a disadvantage.
Equality is not achieved by treating everyone the same......How can that be equality? And why should everyone be able to achieve the same results
What you are after is equality of outcome. I want equality of opportunity. Very different things.
Making sure everyone CAN achieve the same results is not the same as making sure everyone achieves the same results. I do actually see what you are saying but i think on this point, you're wrong.
Where I work (top uni in London) students in my faculty are way majority non 'white'. In pharmacy it is well over 95%. We do not positively discriminate. Th demographic reflects who applies and who gets the A levels. However if these clowns justify 'positive' discrimination based on ethnicity because of an inbalance in present employees in relation to ethnic breakdown, then so should we, surely? But it is all bollocks. As someone said very early on in this thread, best applicant gets the job. This has nothing to do with, and is no solution to ethnic underpresentation in certain professions. I went on an unconscious bias course last year. That was useful. This sort of ****wittery is not.
I totally agree with your second statement regarding treating people the same and giving the same chance and opportunity.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,332
theres the problem "currently accepted framework", open to change. and sows the seeds of dissent as we can see.
You are right up to a point (equality of opportunity). But not everyone can achieve the same results, with the best will in the world. Certain threshold requirements must be met (none of which should be based on race). Consider this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbnkY1tBvMU
What is meant is that everybody must be given the chance to achieve the same results. Even if that is impossible. For example:
A wheelchair user being escorted through a VIP route to the front of house at a giv or a play. The result is they've got to see and enjoy the event but used different means from most of the audience to achieve that result. Would anyone say "that's unfair, she got to sit at the front"?
Same thing.
Seriously, I think that the pursuit of the absurd can only undermine a worthy cause. Symbolic of a struggle with reality?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R79yYo2aOZs
Look, it's about using different methods depending on needs , to achieve a desirable result. This case is about seeking the result of having more minorities in the workforce. It's pretty simple really. Or.
"I want to play basketball"
"Don't be daft, you're in a wheelchair, you'll never achieve that result".
D
Deleted member 22389
Guest
Apart from people with disabilities, the rest of it is bullshit. How much money do our councils and government waste sending people on courses, so that we don't offend anyone. I'm all for common sense, picking the best person for the job.
I believe job selection should be based on merit, if candidates are equal in terms of ability, then it obviously goes down to the one with the best rack.
You joke but there's a Marketing Director in a very big factoring company in Brighton that uses exactly that type of criteria. The better the person looks in a tight skirt the better their chances of getting a job there. The agencies even laugh about it now as it's been going on so long.
I'd better get myself down to the ladies department at M&S then...again.