Diversity officer in UK - "Women of colour can't be racist or sexist"

DEFTLEFTHAND

MathDebater wrote: »

These people don't stand a chance of getting a job in the real world. So they get involved in politics, work in quangos or stay in academia regurgitating these views.

Getting a job in the real world would be their worst nightmare anyway. The Students Union politburo is a place where they rule the roost and are surrounded by likeminded people, nobody there challenges the bullsh1t for fear of being ostracised.

The rest of the students outside of this are too busy not giving a sh1t, they're more focused on things like getting their degree and securing future employment.

Lord PuppyMcSnuggle of Cuddleshire

Well, you have to keep reminding the general public how oppressed they are by each other, otherwise they might notice all the rich people stealing from them. If these people weren't distracted by race baiting and gender politics, they might instead join Greenpeace or something.

darkpagandeath

I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are. --Homer Simpson

ScumLord

who the fug wrote: »

Seems kind of racist to suggest a black person can' t hold a microphone

Touche sir, you win this round of PC fencing.

Cold War Kid

Greenmachine wrote: »

Thank god the consensus is against her. I was beginning to think the world was gone mad.

I'm not a bit surprised the consensus is against her. The notion that there's overwhelming support for these caricatures, like something out of Viz, is unfounded. I never see any support for this stuff other than internet threads by a few loonies, who get easily shouted down.

who the fug

ScumLord wrote: »

Touche sir, you win this round of PC fencing.

Let's be clear I was being a bolshie gob****e and was taking the pies, have being doing that all day

who the fug

Why the **** is G O B S H I T E filtered, if its good enough for star trek it be good enough for here

rubadub

I'd say the racists & sexists are glad not to have this stupid cunt counted amongst them, would give them a bad name.

RDM_83 again

Cold War Kid wrote: »

I'm not a bit surprised the consensus is against her. The notion that there's overwhelming support for these caricatures, like something out of Viz, is unfounded. I never see any support for this stuff other than internet threads by a few loonies, who get easily shouted down.

As I mentioned earlier, explain the UCL SU backing her thing then?

who the fug

RDM_83 again wrote: »

As I mentioned earlier, explain the UCL SU backing her thing then?

They be students

smurgen

She seems like a manipulative horrible young woman with a horrific persecution complex. I had to switch off her waffle.it started woefully with her banging on about "our struggle" and went downhill from there.thank god I don't know women like this in real life.

who the fug

Also what happened to Atari Jaguar

RDM_83 again

who the fug wrote: »

They be students

Its an organisation representing 26 thousand people its more than a few internet trolls

LDN_Irish

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Its an organisation representing 26 thousand people its more than a few internet trolls

Did you go to university? I did for 1 year only (caaalidge drawpout) and the kind of people who register to join the SU are the kind of people who come out with the kind of **** your wan has said.

I didn't join, nobody I knew did. Assuming you haven't been, if you did, you wouldn't join! Hence a load of likeminded people circle jerking.

Not to inflate his already massive ego, but check out FTA69s posts on this subject, he's bang on the money with every one of them. The thing is, the British left wing press (Guardian) have a vested interest in propagating this stuff because it fits in with their outlook. The right wing press (DM/Telegraph) has a vested interest in reporting these things as if they're really entrenched viewpoints that the right has to unite against. The Irish press just feeds off of the bottom of the British gutter and either implies that we need to be more like them or we need to panic because we are going to end up like them.

The truth is somewhere in between, as it usually is.

smurgen

The problem is all hers.she has a pre conceived bias against certain people.she has notions of how they view her.as a result I imagine she has negative interactions with them.it's a self fulfilling prophecy.

end of the road

smurgen wrote: »

She seems like a manipulative horrible young woman with a horrific persecution complex. I had to switch off her waffle.it started woefully with her banging on about "our struggle" and went downhill from there.thank god I don't know women like this in real life.

she's clearly 99 cent short of a euro i'm afraid

RDM_83 again

LDN_Irish wrote: »

Did you go to university? I did for 1 year only (caaalidge drawpout) and the kind of people who register to join the SU are the kind of people who come out with the kind of **** your wan has said.

I didn't join, nobody I knew did. Assuming you haven't been, if you did, you wouldn't join! Hence a load of likeminded people circle jerking.

Not to inflate his already massive ego, but check out FTA69s posts on this subject, he's bang on the money with every one of them. The thing is, the British left wing press (Guardian) have a vested interest in propagating this stuff because it fits in with their outlook. The right wing press (DM/Telegraph) has a vested interest in reporting these things as if they're really entrenched viewpoints that the right has to unite against. The Irish press just feeds off of the bottom of the British gutter and either implies that we need to be more like them or we need to panic because we are going to end up like them.

The truth is somewhere in between, as it usually is.

LDN_Irish wrote: »

Did you go to university? I did for 1 year only (caaalidge drawpout) and the kind of people who register to join the SU are the kind of people who come out with the kind of **** your wan has said.

I didn't join, nobody I knew did. Assuming you haven't been, if you did, you wouldn't join! Hence a load of likeminded people circle jerking.

Not to inflate his already massive ego, but check out FTA69s posts on this subject, he's bang on the money with every one of them. The thing is, the British left wing press (Guardian) have a vested interest in propagating this stuff because it fits in with their outlook. The right wing press (DM/Telegraph) has a vested interest in reporting these things as if they're really entrenched viewpoints that the right has to unite against. The Irish press just feeds off of the bottom of the British gutter and either implies that we need to be more like them or we need to panic because we are going to end up like them.

The truth is somewhere in between, as it usually is.

Oh I know how limited most students involvement in SU's is and what self serving tw@ts most involved in it are (was actually a class rep, got kicked off because I only ever went to one long pointless meeting ).

But the fact that a major one like UCL, which isn't a small liberal arts college like Goldsmith, considers this a person worth defending shows how there has been a shift among the subsection that is involved in these activities even further towards this divisive SJW ideology in that the automatic reaction is to defend her even with her comments, at least the No Free Speech for Facists thing while deeply hypocritical had the advantage that they are rather nasty rather than just having the 'wrong' ethnicity or bits between their legs.

Tombi!

who the fug wrote: »

Also what happened to Atari Jaguar

You have no idea how tempted I am to add it in now. :pac:

Just a little Samba

Ok. So I have finally listened to the video, researched the context of the video and looked into who the person them self is.

As it turns out they are a queer, disabled person from a BME (Black/Minority Ethnic, it's a term used by the government in the UK to describe non white/non European people) working class background.

They are basically using the definition of racism used by people like Hooks, Giddens and other eminent sociologists. In that sense they are right.

In the context of the UK (where Mustafa lives) if you understand racism to be structural, historical oppression of people of ethnic minorities and sexism to be structural, historical oppression of women, then Mustafa is 100% correct, it is impossible for Mustafa (a queer person of colour) to be racist or sexist.

As has been side in this thread, the idea of "reserve racism" is frankly ridiculous. People of colour are a minority in the UK, are under represented in parliament, the legal profession, the civil service and so on. The idea that they are somehow banding together to "oppress" white people or that women are banding together to "oppress" men is, without exception, laughable.

It's entirely possible for minorities or women to be prejudiced, to be bigoted, to be stupid and more.

But from a purely academic, theoretical point of view, in the context of the UK (and most of the world, to be frank), it is in fact impossible for women to be sexist or for people of colour to be racist.

Now if your understanding of racism is "not liking people from other races" and you understanding of sexism is "not liking people of the opposite sex" then sure, she's wrong, but the truth is your understanding of racism and sexism are extremely limited and you'd do well to read a bit more.

Eugene Norman

Just a little Samba wrote: »

Ok. So I have finally listened to the video, researched the context of the video and looked into who the person them self is.

As it turns out they are a queer, disabled person from a BME (Black/Minority Ethnic, it's a term used by the government in the UK to describe non white/non European people) working class background.

They are basically using the definition of racism used by people like Hooks, Giddens and other eminent sociologists. In that sense they are right.

In the context of the UK (where Mustafa lives) if you understand racism to be structural, historical oppression of people of ethnic minorities and sexism to be structural, historical oppression of women, then Mustafa is 100% correct, it is impossible for Mustafa (a queer person of colour) to be racist or sexist.

As has been side in this thread, the idea of "reserve racism" is frankly ridiculous. People of colour are a minority in the UK, are under represented in parliament, the legal profession, the civil service and so on. The idea that they are somehow banding together to "oppress" white people or that women are banding together to "oppress" men is, without exception, laughable.

It's entirely possible for minorities or women to be prejudiced, to be bigoted, to be stupid and more.

But from a purely academic, theoretical point of view, in the context of the UK (and most of the world, to be frank), it is in fact impossible for women to be sexist or for people of colour to be racist.

Now if your understanding of racism is "not liking people from other races" and you understanding of sexism is "not liking people of the opposite sex" then sure, she's wrong, but the truth is your understanding of racism and sexism are extremely limited and you'd do well to read a bit more.

Of course most of the "historical oppression of ethnic minorities" in the UK was of whites, particularly Catholic and Irish.

In 1997 my dad was pulled out of his southern registered car by a British soldier who was black. Privilege and power worked only one way then.

Most of this tosh is American influenced claptrap, blaming all whites for a cultural domination that's largely American, or class or regionally based. In the UK the scots, Welsh, Catholic Irish, northerners, the peasant classes, the poor are historical victims.

As for the historical oppression of women, tell it to the victims of Mary and Liz.

meepins

Just a little Samba wrote: »

The idea that they are somehow banding together to "oppress" white people or that women are banding together to "oppress" men is, without exception, laughable.

The relentless anti white anti male propaganda spewing out of the universities and the media of western societies isn't really happening
****ing bonkers

Just a little Samba

meepins wrote: »

The relentless anti white anti male propaganda spewing out of the universities and the media of western societies isn't really happening
****ing bonkers

Poor oppressed white men. My heart bleeds.
- a white male.

meepins

Just a little Samba wrote: »

Poor oppressed white men. My heart bleeds.
- a white male.

Yes of course. You are signaling your believed sense of moral superiority.

I spit on other whites and other men. Pat me on the back please. Show me approval. Whites are bad and they need to beaten down. They are the cause of all the problems. Gold star for me.

Just a little Samba

meepins wrote: »

Yes of course. You are signaling your believed sense of moral superiority.

I spit on other whites and other men. Pat me on the back please. Show me approval. Whites are bad and they need to beaten down. They are the cause of all the problems. Gold star for me.

Are the italics meant to be your interpretation of what I'm saying?
I'd prefer if you just stuck to what I actually said instead of making things up. Because that would be lovely. Cheers.

meepins

Just a little Samba wrote: »

Are the italics meant to be your interpretation of what I'm saying?

Yes and it's bang on my fellow white male.

barneystinson

Just a little Samba wrote: »

Ok. So I have finally listened to the video, researched the context of the video and looked into who the person them self is.

As it turns out they are a queer, disabled person from a BME (Black/Minority Ethnic, it's a term used by the government in the UK to describe non white/non European people) working class background.

They are basically using the definition of racism used by people like Hooks, Giddens and other eminent sociologists. In that sense they are right.

In the context of the UK (where Mustafa lives) if you understand racism to be structural, historical oppression of people of ethnic minorities and sexism to be structural, historical oppression of women, then Mustafa is 100% correct, it is impossible for Mustafa (a queer person of colour) to be racist or sexist.

As has been side in this thread, the idea of "reserve racism" is frankly ridiculous. People of colour are a minority in the UK, are under represented in parliament, the legal profession, the civil service and so on. The idea that they are somehow banding together to "oppress" white people or that women are banding together to "oppress" men is, without exception, laughable.

It's entirely possible for minorities or women to be prejudiced, to be bigoted, to be stupid and more.

But from a purely academic, theoretical point of view, in the context of the UK (and most of the world, to be frank), it is in fact impossible for women to be sexist or for people of colour to be racist.

Now if your understanding of racism is "not liking people from other races" and you understanding of sexism is "not liking people of the opposite sex" then sure, she's wrong, but the truth is your understanding of racism and sexism are extremely limited and you'd do well to read a bit more.

This is all well and good, but the academic definitions of racism and sexism are just that, academic. The vernacular use of the terms is pretty much as you've described them, and as borne out by the poll result.

So when people describe her as racist and sexist they don't mean it in the eminent sociologist sense of the words, they mean it in the **** you if you're prejudiced against whites and/or males sense of the words...

Eugene Norman

Just a little Samba wrote: »

Poor oppressed white men. My heart bleeds.
- a white male.

every time somebody whose earning 100k+ a year sneers at working class whites another ten join UKIP.

I come from a long left wing position of oppressed whites as it happens. We called them the proletariat. When did the rich make "identity politics" the only politics.

Eugene Norman

barneystinson wrote: »

This is all well and good, but the academic definitions of racism and sexism are just that, academic. The vernacular use of the terms is pretty much as you've described them, and as borne out by the poll result.

So when people describe her as racist and sexist they don't mean it in the eminent sociologist sense of the words, they mean it in the **** you if you're prejudiced against whites and/or males sense of the words...

Not just academic but largely sourced from American academia, as if all countries had the same history, as if all whites had the same cultures, as if class, region and nations didn't exist.

Chloris

Maybe if we weren't so quick to malign every person from our most hated demographic, (see:Nazis c.1940) we could pass judgements about people on a case by case basis and see that the individual isn't merely representative of their stereotype. Likewise, while I appreciate the importance of holding on to the past significance of what pack mentality drove people in power to do (see:US c.1930), it's also important not to be blinded by the modern day excuses for discrimination reparations like gender quotas, equal opportunities legislation...

What it really comes down to is, white males have traditionally been the dominant faction in Western culture. So no matter what statistics you present, no matter how many laws attempt to vindicate the culture of equality, the bottom line is that the man at the top will probably be white. It's a perpetual loop of chauvinistic control, and that's in the part of the world which has done anything at all for the rights of females.

Only 16 of 1200+ female billionaires in the world are self-made;
i.e. Daddy sorted the rest of them out.
I think that says it all really, and I'm not even a feminist.

tritium

Chloris wrote: »

Only 16 of 1200+ female billionaires in the world are self-made;
i.e. Daddy sorted the rest of them out.
I think that says it all really, and I'm not even a feminist.

I'm unsure how that last point in anyway relates to any point of feminism apart from the "all women are victims without agency" subset of feminism emanating largely from ivory towers in the US