TV and Radio presenter Danny Baker fired for racist Royal baby tweet.

Good.

"Disgraced Danny Baker has blasted BBC bosses after he was sacked for a royal baby tweet showing a picture of monkey wearing a suit outside a hospital.
The BBC Radio 5 Live host said he had been 'literally thrown under the bus' as he was fired over the phone this morning in what he described as a 'masterclass of pompous faux-gravity.'
The broadcaster, who earlier denied he was racist as he spoke on the doorstep of his £2million home sparked outrage after uploading an image of a couple holding hands with a monkey with the caption: 'Royal baby leaves hospital.'
Baker, 61, deleted the picture as soon as he realised the controversy, and later branded it a 'stupid unthinking gag' when he was hit by a huge backlash as users called it 'racist' because of Meghan's heritage.
He had posted the image just hours after Prince Harry and Meghan, whose mother Doria Ragland is African American, showed off baby Archie to the world at Windsor Castle yesterday."


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7009283/BBC-Radio-5-Live-host-Danny-Baker-tweets-racist-Royal-Baby-monkey-image.html

Does anyone here think this was NOT intended as a racist insult?



Baker insisted the picture was actually about 'class and privilege', not race.

What did he think people would make of that?

What an asshat. Just saw his so-called apology. There is absolutely no excuse for this garbage in today’s world. Good on the Beeb.

What a prat !

His bumbling explanation (on video) where he is stood on his doorstep waffling and trying to claim it was meant to highlight class and privilege not race was....pathetic.

How does he make out "class and privilege", and not see the racist implications?

Original Quill wrote:How does he make out "class and privilege", and not see the racist implications?

He thought he was being clever and edgy, and it's backfired.
I really dont see how anyone can claim they are not racist when they even think along the lines of comparing a mixed race baby to a little monkey.

There's probably a job waiting for him at Breitbart or one of its' ilk...

Or maybe he could be a speech writer for Donald Trump..

Perhaps he could form a triumvirate with thick like minded morons Hatie Flopkins and Jon Gaunt .
They are all closet racist pigs, think as shit and hateful, talentless individuals.
They could join UKIP as campaigners.

Disgraceful.

What a twat!

Baker's post was the sort of racist tripe I expected to see from Skunky Stenchbandit.
Skunky is probably sulking because Baker beat him to it.

well, how very virtuous you all are

well done

My view on this.

Was it intentially racist?

No

Was it stupidity of the highest factor, of course.

Personally, I think he did this to garner attention and he certainly has that now for what was clearly a moment of complete madness. As I dont doubt for one minute he believed it would not garner a reaction. As some people love the limelight, more so, when they are fading into obscurity.

gelico wrote:


well, how very virtuous you all are

well done

Interesting Gels.
So you dont think he was being racist or stupid....or you think he was but people are being too judgmental here?

Syl wrote:

gelico wrote:


well, how very virtuous you all are

well done

Interesting Gels.
So you dont think he was being racist or stupid....or you think he was but people are being too judgmental here?

The question to ask, is whether anyone have batted an eyelid, if this had been when one of William and Kates children had been born?

The photo is not of one mixed ethnically person and someone classed as white.

Its two parents that are classed as white, with a baby monkey in a suit and bowler hat

Looking at that picture on its own, without the recent Royal birth and the Mothers mixed ethnicity. Would anyone class the picture as racist?

The answer is no, is it not?

Though he must have surely realised that people would take her ethnic backround and then place two and 1 together to make 4.

Yes chimps have been used pooorly many times to invoke racism and hence why his actions here were clearly utterly stupid.

If this person has a history of racism, you could understand.

The reality is though, he made a really dumb and stupid choice of photo's.

phil wrote:The question to ask, is whether anyone have batted an eyelid, if this had been when one of William and Kates children had been born?

The offensiveness comes not from who is the subject, but from the insult to black people generally.

It's an old, but distasteful joke...to liken a black to a monkey. It's symbolic, just as a noose is symbolic.  Kate & William, Harry & Meghan, it doesn't matter.  It's distasteful wherever it appears.

No more judgemental than his employers.
They did the right thing.
Stupid people shouldn't earn big bucks from the licence payer.

Syl wrote:

gelico wrote:


well, how very virtuous you all are

well done

Interesting Gels.
So you dont think he was being racist or stupid....or you think he was but people are being too judgmental here?

partly what didge said,


stupid, yes. racist no


I vaguely remember Danny Baker from 90s. Bumptious, boisterous, irritating at times. I neither liked nor disliked him tbh although i remember him being a very popular guest on numerous shows. He has a media/radio/tv career for 40 years. has he ever been in t rouble for any kind of racism?

he said it was about class. in all honesty i don't look at megan markle and see mixed race at all. i have to be reminded that her mum is black. he may well not even entered his head along those lines whatsoever and i'm not prepared to just assume, along with the herd, that he is a racist monster

furthermore, when he realised the implications that 'other people' had put on this tweet, he deleted it, he apologised, he said it was an error of judgement

what more is he supposed to do exactly?

why are people unable to accept an apology and a deletion of something considered inappropriate

why is it 'good' that he has lost his job?

there seems to be more hatred and spite coming from the twitterati virtue signallers than anything danny baker could say.

that's what

It was distasteful because it was about a baby but racist? Possibly. I’m not too sure....he’s never come across as racist before.

Gelico wrote:furthermore, when he realised the implications that 'other people' had put on this tweet, he deleted it, he apologised, he said it was an error of judgement

Bullshite. He knew exactly what he was doing.

When he realized he could lose his job, that's what caused him to delete it.

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

Interesting Gels.
So you dont think he was being racist or stupid....or you think he was but people are being too judgmental here?

The question to ask, is whether anyone have batted an eyelid, if this had been when one of William and Kates children had been born?

The photo is not of one mixed ethnically person and someone classed as white.

Its two parents that are classed as white, with a baby monkey in a suit and bowler hat

Looking at that picture on its own, without the recent Royal birth and the Mothers mixed ethnicity. Would anyone class the picture as racist?

The answer is no, is it not?

Though he must have surely realised that people would take her ethnic backround and then place two and 1 together to make 4.

Yes chimps have been used pooorly many times to invoke racism and hence why his actions here were clearly utterly stupid.

If this person has a history of racism, you could understand.

The reality is though, he made a really dumb and stupid choice of photo's.

I was asking Gels.

But I will ask you a question.

Did Baker post any similar pics the three times Kate and William posed with their newborns?

If he did then he is just crass and stupid....if he didn't and knowing the way some ignoramusis compare anyone who is black or of black origin with monkeys.....he knew damn well what he was doing.

I have read he is trying to defend himself by saying he didn't know Meghan was of mixed race....he works in the media where Meghan and her lifestyle haven't been off the front pages for the last couple of years, so imo that makes him a liar as well as a racist.

eddie wrote:It was distasteful because it was about a baby but racist? Possibly. I’m not too sure....he’s never come across as racist before.

Is this racist...



...when sent to a black person?

I don’t know tbh. Haven’t white people been hung?

gelico wrote:

Syl wrote:

Interesting Gels.
So you dont think he was being racist or stupid....or you think he was but people are being too judgmental here?

partly what didge said,


stupid, yes.  racist no


I vaguely remember Danny Baker from 90s.  Bumptious, boisterous, irritating at times.  I neither liked nor disliked him tbh although i remember him being a very popular guest on numerous shows.  He has a media/radio/tv career for 40 years.  has he ever been in t rouble for any kind of racism?

he said it was about class.  in all honesty i don't look at megan markle and see mixed race at all.  i have to be reminded that her mum is black.  he may well not even entered his head along those lines whatsoever and i'm not prepared to just assume, along with the herd, that he is a racist monster

furthermore, when he realised the implications that 'other people' had put on this tweet, he deleted it, he apologised, he said it was an error of judgement

what more is he supposed to do exactly?

why are people unable to accept an apology and a deletion of something considered inappropriate

why is it 'good' that he has lost his job?

there seems to be more hatred and spite coming from the twitterati virtue signallers than anything danny baker could say.

that's what

Many people do look at Meghan and see a woman of colour, and she has been trolled in the worst possible way because of that.
Why would a man who works in the media and has a huge following think he could get away with comparing her child to a monkey?

He removed the tweet because he realised what a shit storm it had caused....is it fair he was sacked, imo definately.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

The question to ask, is whether anyone have batted an eyelid, if this had been when one of William and Kates children had been born?

The photo is not of one mixed ethnically person and someone classed as white.

Its two parents that are classed as white, with a baby monkey in a suit and bowler hat

Looking at that picture on its own, without the recent Royal birth and the Mothers mixed ethnicity. Would anyone class the picture as racist?

The answer is no, is it not?

Though he must have surely realised that people would take her ethnic backround and then place two and 1 together to make 4.

Yes chimps have been used pooorly many times to invoke racism and hence why his actions here were clearly utterly stupid.

If this person has a history of racism, you could understand.

The reality is though, he made a really dumb and stupid choice of photo's.

I was asking Gels.

But I will ask you a question.

Did Baker post any similar pics the three times Kate and William posed with their newborns?

If he did then he is just crass and stupid....if he didn't and knowing the way some ignoramusis compare anyone who is black or of black origin  with monkeys.....he knew damn well what he was doing.

I have read he is trying to defend himself by saying he didn't know Meghan was of mixed race....he works in the media where Meghan and her lifestyle haven't been off the front pages for the last couple of years, so imo that makes him a liar as well as a racist.

1) The only thing relevant, is whether he has made racist views before. Like I said, would you have formed a view, if this had been one of William and kates children had been born?

The answer is no

2) I think again, this was more about publicity and again due to a fading life from the limelight he once had.

3) The reality is, was it intentially racist? I dont think it was but was certainly, based on the mother easily construed as racist

4) People always go into defense mode when they fuck up and he fucked up.

5) Do I think people are reacting more over how they like Meghan?

Most definately

6) The reality is, he should apologise for what was a really poor choice of humour. He should understand, how it could be taken and it was, the wrong way. What people should be doing is more concentrating and celbrating with them. The birth of their son and am really happy for them.

Syl wrote:

gelico wrote:


partly what didge said,


stupid, yes.  racist no


I vaguely remember Danny Baker from 90s.  Bumptious, boisterous, irritating at times.  I neither liked nor disliked him tbh although i remember him being a very popular guest on numerous shows.  He has a media/radio/tv career for 40 years.  has he ever been in t rouble for any kind of racism?

he said it was about class.  in all honesty i don't look at megan markle and see mixed race at all.  i have to be reminded that her mum is black.  he may well not even entered his head along those lines whatsoever and i'm not prepared to just assume, along with the herd, that he is a racist monster

furthermore, when he realised the implications that 'other people' had put on this tweet, he deleted it, he apologised, he said it was an error of judgement

what more is he supposed to do exactly?

why are people unable to accept an apology and a deletion of something considered inappropriate

why is it 'good' that he has lost his job?

there seems to be more hatred and spite coming from the twitterati virtue signallers than anything danny baker could say.

that's what

Many people do look at Meghan and see a woman of colour, and she has been trolled in the worst possible way because of that.
Why would a man who works in the media and has a huge following think he could get away with comparing her child to a monkey?

He removed the tweet because he realised what a shit storm it had caused....is it fair he was sacked, imo definately.

Then that is the problem with society today

How about looking at her, as a human being and a woman

She has a skin definition darker and that should in no way define any of us. It has been the bases for racism for years

Its now the bases by the left to further dervide us. Based on a oppression point system, based on identity politics

If this is what defines us today, then nobody has learnt a damn thing about racism

Because we are defining people by the colour of their skin and not the content of their character

Syl wrote:

gelico wrote:


partly what didge said,


stupid, yes.  racist no


I vaguely remember Danny Baker from 90s.  Bumptious, boisterous, irritating at times.  I neither liked nor disliked him tbh although i remember him being a very popular guest on numerous shows.  He has a media/radio/tv career for 40 years.  has he ever been in t rouble for any kind of racism?

he said it was about class.  in all honesty i don't look at megan markle and see mixed race at all.  i have to be reminded that her mum is black.  he may well not even entered his head along those lines whatsoever and i'm not prepared to just assume, along with the herd, that he is a racist monster

furthermore, when he realised the implications that 'other people' had put on this tweet, he deleted it, he apologised, he said it was an error of judgement

what more is he supposed to do exactly?

why are people unable to accept an apology and a deletion of something considered inappropriate

why is it 'good' that he has lost his job?

there seems to be more hatred and spite coming from the twitterati virtue signallers than anything danny baker could say.

that's what

Many people do look at Meghan and see a woman of colour, and she has been trolled in the worst possible way because of that.
Why would a man who works in the media and has a huge following think he could get away with comparing her child to a monkey?

He removed the tweet because he realised what a shit storm it had caused....is it fair he was sacked, imo definately.

and that's the depressing thing, syl. why? why do people look at others and see race before anything else?

i'm being honest in the fact that even though i was aware her mum was black, everytime i see megan i forget that (we rarely see her mum)

why is race becoming the defining factor in how we see others?

that sucks

gelico wrote:

Syl wrote:

Many people do look at Meghan and see a woman of colour, and she has been trolled in the worst possible way because of that.
Why would a man who works in the media and has a huge following think he could get away with comparing her child to a monkey?

He removed the tweet because he realised what a shit storm it had caused....is it fair he was sacked, imo definately.

and that's the depressing thing, syl.  why?  why do people look at others and see race before anything else?

i'm being honest in the fact that even though i was aware her mum was black, everytime i see megan i forget that (we rarely see her mum)

why is race becoming the defining factor in how we see others?

that sucks

Great minds think alike

I said the same in the previous post

+1

It's not a monkey!

I actually mostly do see people’s colour, but in a positive way actually.
Example: if I’m joking around with a regular customer at work and they’re black and it’s a hot day I might say
“If I stay out in that sun people may think we are sisters”
They laugh and say “Doubt it girl! You got a long way to go before you catch me up!”

Another example:

“Wow is that sauce hot?” They may say
“Yeah, but it’s jerk sauce...I come from hackney and lived with black guys...and I can handle it dude!”

Pure laughter.


Now of course, I don’t go around obviously noticing someone’s colour per say or for the sake of it, but I also might bring it up.

Because you know....we are a different colour!

Duh.

Never had a problem.

eddie wrote:I actually mostly do see people’s colour, but in a positive way actually.
Example: if I’m joking around with a regular customer at work and they’re black and it’s a hot day I might say
“If I stay out in that sun people may think we are sisters”
They laugh and say “Doubt it girl! You got a long way to go before you catch me up!”

Another example:

“Wow is that sauce hot?” They may say
“Yeah, but it’s jerk sauce...I come from hackney and lived with black guys...and I can handle it dude!”

Pure laughter.


Now of course, I don’t go around obviously noticing someone’s colour per say or for the sake of it, but I also might bring it up.

Because you know....we are a different colour!

Duh.

Never had a problem.

Okay, do you apply the same reasoning with their eye colour?

Natural Hair colour?

Do you define people by these?

Do you define people by their disabilities?

By their age?

By their ideologies?

By their politics or religions?

If no to the above, why skin colour?

Even more so when the colour of skin changes seasonally and with age?

I understand how you make light humour of this, but does skin colour really define who we are?

He's a media professional, communication is his job, and he should have known people would take it as racist.

Leaving out the question of whether he's racist, there's a good chance the BBC fired him for sheer incompetence.

eddie wrote:I actually mostly do see people’s colour, but in a positive way actually.
Example: if I’m joking around with a regular customer at work and they’re black and it’s a hot day I might say
“If I stay out in that sun people may think we are sisters”
They laugh and say “Doubt it girl! You got a long way to go before you catch me up!”

Another example:

“Wow is that sauce hot?” They may say
“Yeah, but it’s jerk sauce...I come from hackney and lived with black guys...and I can handle it dude!”

Pure laughter.


Now of course, I don’t go around obviously noticing someone’s colour per say or for the sake of it, but I also might bring it up.

Because you know....we are a different colour!

Duh.

Never had a problem.

yes, all very nice but you're totally missing the point eddie


''when people look at megan markle they see a person of colour''


why is that the first thing to focus on?

she is a

woman
actress
independent thinker
divorcee
wife of a prince
mother of a son


why focus on skin colour is and automatically assume racism

Ben Reilly wrote:He's a media professional, communication is his job, and he should have known people would take it as racist.

Leaving out the question of whether he's racist, there's a good chance the BBC fired him for sheer incompetence.

So why does this rule not apply to far more important people?

Take Ilhan Omar, making antisemitic views against Jews?

Or Linda Sarsour, telling a victim of FGM, that she would take her vagina away?

Do you not think, there is a certain massive amount of hypocrisy and defense when people make poor comments

So why are the two above still in their positions

One as part of the US representative and the other part of a women's march?

phildidge wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:He's a media professional, communication is his job, and he should have known people would take it as racist.

Leaving out the question of whether he's racist, there's a good chance the BBC fired him for sheer incompetence.

So why does this rule not apply to far more important people?

Take Ilhan Omar, making antisemitic views against Jews?

Or Linda Sarsour, telling a victim of FGM, that she would take her vagina away?

Do you not think, there is a certain massive amount of hypocrisy and defense when people make poor comments

So why are the two above still in their positions

One as part of the US representative and the other part of a women's march?

I have no idea; I'm not nearly as familiar with the UK media as I am with the media in the U.S.

Ben Reilly wrote:

phildidge wrote:

So why does this rule not apply to far more important people?

Take Ilhan Omar, making antisemitic views against Jews?

Or Linda Sarsour, telling a victim of FGM, that she would take her vagina away?

Do you not think, there is a certain massive amount of hypocrisy and defense when people make poor comments

So why are the two above still in their positions

One as part of the US representative and the other part of a women's march?

I have no idea; I'm not nearly as familiar with the UK media as I am with the media in the U.S.

Well many Jews were offended by the clear antisemitic views made by Ilhan Omar

People called for her to resign

Democrats defended her

She was overtly antisemitic

phildidge wrote:

eddie wrote:I actually mostly do see people’s colour, but in a positive way actually.
Example: if I’m joking around with a regular customer at work and they’re black and it’s a hot day I might say
“If I stay out in that sun people may think we are sisters”
They laugh and say “Doubt it girl! You got a long way to go before you catch me up!”

Another example:

“Wow is that sauce hot?” They may say
“Yeah, but it’s jerk sauce...I come from hackney and lived with black guys...and I can handle it dude!”

Pure laughter.


Now of course, I don’t go around obviously noticing someone’s colour per say or for the sake of it, but I also might bring it up.

Because you know....we are a different colour!

Duh.

Never had a problem.

Okay, do you apply the same reasoning with their eye colour?

Natural Hair colour?

Do you define people by these?

Do you define people by their disabilities?

By their age?

By their ideologies?

By their politics or religions?

If no to the above, why skin colour?

Even more so when the colour of skin changes seasonally and with age?

I understand how you make light humour of this, but does skin colour really define who we are?

Yes to all of the above. I’ll make certain jokes to old people, people on crutches, people who are in wheelchairs etc....I’m not stupid, I don’t make jokes with people I don’t know well or who don’t seem “jokey”.

I don’t know, I have a way of just communicating with almost everyone. Ask Ben. He has seen me at work.

gelico wrote:

eddie wrote:I actually mostly do see people’s colour, but in a positive way actually.
Example: if I’m joking around with a regular customer at work and they’re black and it’s a hot day I might say
“If I stay out in that sun people may think we are sisters”
They laugh and say “Doubt it girl! You got a long way to go before you catch me up!”

Another example:

“Wow is that sauce hot?” They may say
“Yeah, but it’s jerk sauce...I come from hackney and lived with black guys...and I can handle it dude!”

Pure laughter.


Now of course, I don’t go around obviously noticing someone’s colour per say or for the sake of it, but I also might bring it up.

Because you know....we are a different colour!

Duh.

Never had a problem.

yes, all very nice but you're totally missing the point eddie


''when people look at megan markle they see a person of colour''


why is that the first thing to focus on?

she is a

woman
actress
independent thinker
divorcee
wife of a prince
mother of a son


why focus on skin colour is and automatically assume racism

Honestly the first thing I see when I look at her is her beautiful smile. That’s the first thing I notice.

Do you know why I bring this up Ben?

Because based on the intersectionality tree. Jews are seen as part of white privilege and thus. To this leftist doctrine. Do not obtain enough oppression points and how some vile antisemitism becomes acceptable. This is the problem with intersectionality. People based seeing people based on race, religion, gender, LGTB etc. Based on how much they are oppressed as a minority. Hence the more minority a group you are, the more, you win oppression points and your views count more than others. Which is ironic, being that the Jews, as an ethnic group religiously and ethnically. Have suffered more throughout history and in more places than any other group (bar people made extinct) and yet constantly people make excuses for antisemitism.

So when I see articles like this and where people do not have a history of racism. I take the view two ways. Is this person actually racism and has a history. Or is this more a political point.

The person in the video is Deborah Lipstadt, who was taken to court by a Far right racist holocaust denier and she won her case. She knows antisemitism and yet we have people on the left and Jew haters trying to tell Jews what antisemitism is. Linda sarsour being one of them. A woman, that told a FGM victim, she wanted to take her vagina away and this from a so called women standing for womens rights.

So please spare me how people react. The people on the right and left will at times defend bigotry and discrimination.

gelico wrote:

eddie wrote:I actually mostly do see people’s colour, but in a positive way actually.
Example: if I’m joking around with a regular customer at work and they’re black and it’s a hot day I might say
“If I stay out in that sun people may think we are sisters”
They laugh and say “Doubt it girl! You got a long way to go before you catch me up!”

Another example:

“Wow is that sauce hot?” They may say
“Yeah, but it’s jerk sauce...I come from hackney and lived with black guys...and I can handle it dude!”

Pure laughter.


Now of course, I don’t go around obviously noticing someone’s colour per say or for the sake of it, but I also might bring it up.

Because you know....we are a different colour!

Duh.

Never had a problem.

yes, all very nice but you're totally missing the point eddie


''when people look at megan markle they see a person of colour''


why is that the first thing to focus on?

she is a

woman
actress
independent thinker
divorcee
wife of a prince
mother of a son


why focus on skin colour is and automatically assume racism

We all see color; nobody can honestly say that they didn't notice what color Obama is, right? You can bet that black peopled noticed the President was black. Everyone did.

Now you have a mixed-race Duchess and people are going to notice her color, too.

You can do one of three things: You can notice someone's skin color and think less of them for it; you can notice someone's color, even mention it and joke around about it like eddie said, and think of them the same as you think of more or less everyone else; or you can notice someone's color but pretend to ignore it, thinking of them as someone who has no identity in that regard.

I think the first and third options pretty much suck.

eddie wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Okay, do you apply the same reasoning with their eye colour?

Natural Hair colour?

Do you define people by these?

Do you define people by their disabilities?

By their age?

By their ideologies?

By their politics or religions?

If no to the above, why skin colour?

Even more so when the colour of skin changes seasonally and with age?

I understand how you make light humour of this, but does skin colour really define who we are?

Yes to all of the above. I’ll make certain jokes to old people, people on crutches, people who are in wheelchairs etc....I’m not stupid, I don’t make jokes with people I don’t know well or who don’t seem “jokey”.

I don’t know, I have a way of just communicating with almost everyone.  Ask Ben. He has seen me at work.  

So you make jokes with people based on their eye colour?

Natural hair colour and define them this way?

I can understand you make light hearted jokes about people on age

You said a few weeks back you made a joke with someone classed as black about their skin colour?

Sorry Eddie, but you are changing what you have said before

Dont get me wrong, there is not a hateful bone in your body and as seen, you choose to define people to lighten the mood, but that is not how I see to define people.

To me, its what is inside of them, not how they look in how I define them. Even them people make mistakes and it has nothing to do with their age, skin colour, eye colour, disabilities etc.

Of course I see the inside of them didge and I know you know I’m not hateful - I just can’t explain my personality on the whole.
I may mention someone’s eye colour if they have particularly beautiful eyes? I may, and often do, remark on someone who is wearing a jaunty hat or cool sunglasses.

I’m a people person.

Ben Reilly wrote:

gelico wrote:



yes, all very nice but you're totally missing the point eddie


''when people look at megan markle they see a person of colour''


why is that the first thing to focus on?

she is a

woman
actress
independent thinker
divorcee
wife of a prince
mother of a son


why focus on skin colour is and automatically assume racism

We all see color; nobody can honestly say that they didn't notice what color Obama is, right? You can bet that black peopled noticed the President was black. Everyone did.

Now you have a mixed-race Duchess and people are going to notice her color, too.

You can do one of three things: You can notice someone's skin color and think less of them for it; you can notice someone's color, even mention it and joke around about it like eddie said, and think of them the same as you think of more or less everyone else; or you can notice someone's color but pretend to ignore it, thinking of them as someone who has no identity in that regard.

I think the first and third options pretty much suck.

But why are you defining him based on his skin colour?

This to me, is the failing of the left. In that they fail to understand racism

If skin colour defines us, then we will perpetually walk down a path od divide and not unity

It was not his skin colour that define the good he did domestically

It was his views and intelligence that did that

I mean, do you really think I need to notice how fair your skin is, your eye colour, your hair colour, to understand what kind of human being you are? Its a sad reality that people on the left think that skin colour matters and not eye or hair colour. When inside, our blood is all the same colour, its red. Our skin colour changes with the seasons. So why, to you, should that be even important?

Seriously?

Of course we notice the differences between people, and yet, you center on only skin colour?
Nobody defines people by their eye colour or hair colour. No races are defined this way, yet skin colour is. Yet you think, this should be the defining factor to notice about people? I think I notice what is the character of what they say. Just as I fell in love with your love story. Just as I fell in love with the memories Gelico speaks of with her late husband. Skin colour has nothing to do with that. The moment you make skin colour important. Is the moment you succumb to a racist mentality itself. As its not a skin colour that defines us, but how we act. We dont define the colour of skin for any other species, except ourselves, as if it bears some importance. Why?

I mean do you apply the differences in skin colour to eye colour, hair colour, height, age etc to define who people are?

We are simple humans first and foremost and such thinking to seperate us by skin colour. Is utterly stupid, as skin colour is only skin deep.

It’s not about defining didge, I’m simply saying it’s hard not to notice a skin colour, a tall person, a really fat person etc.
It isn’t about “defining” them. That’s not what I said.

eddie wrote:Of course I see the inside of them didge and I know you know I’m not hateful - I just can’t explain my personality on the whole.
I may mention someone’s eye colour if they have particularly beautiful eyes? I may, and often do, remark on someone who is wearing a jaunty hat or cool sunglasses.

I’m a people person.

But you don not define people by their eye colour or hair colour, so why skin?

I will tell you why, because people have been fed a lie for decades about a unscientifc claim. To claim we are actually different by our skin colour

No we are not, as we are all human and all capable of making the same mistakes and good deeds. Skin colouration has no bearing on this

The reality is this. People are so shit scared of being seen as racist, that they want to be seen as non -racist. Not even understanding they are fueling what racism is. A view to seek to divide us based on shades of skin colour. As if this some how defines us.

So tell me Eddie, what is the difference between someone with dark skin, to fair skin?

If this is nothing more than superificial, then why play into the racist mentality to seek to make us different?

Without poor racial seperation thinking, would racism exist?

eddie wrote:It’s not about defining didge, I’m simply saying it’s hard not to notice a skin colour, a tall person, a really fat person etc.
It isn’t about “defining” them. That’s not what I said.

So your view is to notice people based on colouration

Again, why not then on eye colour?

Or hair colour

Why only skin colour?

But!
I don’t see differences as negative.
And therein lies your answer.

eddie wrote:But!
I don’t see differences as negative.
And therein lies your answer.

So where is the positive difference from this?

I see many people positivelly and I post countless stories all the time on this

Do you see me ever post this based on skin colour?

So what bearing does skin colour have in the positive, when its used more so in the negative?

That is where your argument falls down. Skin colour should be seen as neutral within humans. It has no bearing on what a human being is.

The moment you argue in the positive or negative fuels this hate of racism