University of Edinburgh is accused of 'blatant racism' for hosting an equality conference where white people are BANNED from asking questions

by Guest Sat Sep 28, 2019 1:25 pm

First topic message reminder :

Edinburgh University has been slated for hosting an event where white people will be banned from asking questions - which has been described as 'blatantly racist'.

A Q&A event - Resisting Whiteness 2019 - will bar Caucasian guests from speaking from the floor.

There will also be two 'safe spaces' - one of which white people are banned from entering.

University bosses have 'raised concerns' about aspects of the event.

The event will take place on Saturday at the prestigious university, with the intention of 'amplifying the voices of people of colour' and giving 'people of colour a platform to talk'.

The all-day event costs up to £20 to attend, and will be held at the Pleasance Theatre.

A blurb says: 'We will therefore not be giving the microphone to white people during the Q&As, not because we don't think white people have anything to offer to the discussion, but because we want to amplify the voices of people of colour.

'If you are a white person with a question, please share it with a member of the committee or our speakers after the panel discussion.'

And it explains why white people have been barred from one of the 'safe spaces' - for people to retreat if they feel 'overwhelmed/overstimulated or uncomfortable'.

It said: 'The Braid room is a safe space for only people of colour, and the Cheviot room is available for anyone who needs it.'

Anti-racism campaigner Jane McColl, 42, of Glasgow said: 'This event is blatantly racist.

'It sets back the battle to achieve equality and fairness by decades, all because of the actions of a tiny group of extremists, whose perverse sense of logic has led them to belittle white people, not by who they are as individuals, by merely because of their skin colour.

'Imagine if this event was called 'Resisting Blackness' and non-white people were told they could not ask questions, nor access a room because they were the 'wrong' colour.'

A spokesman for the University of Edinburgh said: 'Tackling racism is an important topic for debate and the University is supportive of events addressing this issue.

'However, we are an organisation that places great value on issues around equality and voice.

'Consequently the University has met with the event organisers to ensure the event is compliant with our values.

'We have expressed our concerns to them about certain aspects of the format of the event and they are revising their 'safe space' policy for the conference as a result.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7513201/Edinburgh-University-accused-racism-conference-white-people-ask-questions.html

by Maddog Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:19 pm

eddie wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Nah, he looks down on people and likes to remind them of his education and station in life (which I find a bit suspect anyway).

Well that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it. I just think he doesn’t understand racism too well....it’s my main (and only) bone of contention with him tbh.

It's not my opinion that he belittles people based on his reported level of education. I've seen him do it numerous times.

I have no way of knowing if he works out with Chuck Norris like he said, or has been a friend of Camille Paglia for 40 years. I doubt it, however that is just my opinion.

by Original Quill Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:27 am

Ben wrote:I figure the white working-class students there don't have the money for the kind of parties you're talking about, but let's forget about them and pretend that all white people are of the moneyed elite ...

You don't have to be a "moneyed elite" to have an advantage. How would they feel about being in slavery? How would they feel about not having a current stigma of being 'dumb' blacks?

Their advantage is not about elitism, but simply not having the chain around their neck, holding them back.

by Original Quill Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:34 am

Maddog wrote:Nah, he looks down on people and likes to remind them of his education and station in life (which I find a bit suspect anyway).

Or, you feel bad about yourself and your lack of achievement, when you are confronted with what you could have done.

It's all relative. I am what I am. You are what you are. It's not an issue for me...but it certainly is for you.

I think your only defense is denial, and to attack others for what you are not. That's what we are seeing in your agony.

by Original Quill Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:49 am

eddie wrote:I just think he doesn’t understand racism too well....it’s my main (and only) bone of contention with him tbh.

I think what you are seeing is from your middle-of-the-road perspective. Whites don't recognize racism; blacks see nothing but racism. I personally feel that blacks have a better grasp on reality.

Two years ago your husband was about to declare that racism is over. Then, when Charlottesville happened, he was strangely silent. All I was saying, to myself, is...I told you so, but you wouldn't listen.

Denial is a psychological state (reduction of cognitive dissonance), but also the result of perspective, and the result of self-interest. You don't see the black man's perspective because you don't want to see it.

I have simply had enough of the mendacity. I started looking at events from the black man's view, and I was amazed. They live in a prison, within open society, what with the bias, and the cops and the economic constraints. Your disinterest comes from having bigger fish to fry. But for the black man, there is no bigger fish to fry than the way they are treated by a predominately white majority society.

by nicko Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:01 am

by Maddog Tue Oct 01, 2019 2:32 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:Nah, he looks down on people and likes to remind them of his education and station in life (which I find a bit suspect anyway).

Or, you feel bad about yourself and your lack of achievement, when you are confronted with what you could have done.

It's all relative. I am what I am. You are what you are. It's not an issue for me...but it certainly is for you.

I think your only defense is denial, and to attack others for what you are not. That's what we are seeing in your agony.

I feel bad for your need to create fictional relationships and achievements to a bunch of strangers on a forum.

by nicko Tue Oct 01, 2019 2:58 pm

Well said Maddog !

by gelico Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:53 pm

Original Quill wrote:
eddie wrote:I just think he doesn’t understand racism too well....it’s my main (and only) bone of contention with him tbh.

I started looking at events from the black man's view, and I was amazed. They live in a prison, within open society, what with the bias, and the cops and the economic constraints. Your disinterest comes from having bigger fish to fry. But for the black man, there is no bigger fish to fry than the way they are treated by a predominately white majority society.

Quill, this is nonsense. None of the black people I know feel like that at all.

Do you even actually know any black people on a personal level?.

Do they really feel like this?

If so, maybe it's just a Californian thing

Rolling Eyes

by Original Quill Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:26 pm

gelico wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I started looking at events from the black man's view, and I was amazed. They live in a prison, within open society, what with the bias, and the cops and the economic constraints. Your disinterest comes from having bigger fish to fry. But for the black man, there is no bigger fish to fry than the way they are treated by a predominately white majority society.

Quill, this is nonsense. None of the black people I know feel like that at all.

Do you even actually know any black people on a personal level?.

Do they really feel like this?

If so, maybe it's just a Californian thing

Do you feel you must have black friends in order to vindicate your views? Do you think, knowing that you are so adverse to their view, that they would tell you? You are already into your own tribalism. Blacks are just like whites in that they know when to pick their fights. To try to tell you, of all people, how they really feel would be fruitless.

I daresay you have never had this conversation with a black person. Look at yourself. There is no way that you would ever accept what I, or the black man is saying. The discussion has metastasized into tribal positions. Given that degree of things, do you think a black person would even bother to have this discussion with you?

Progressiveism is certainly a California thing in that California is the most progressive state in the US. California is also the most populous state in the US, and surely you know that there is a strong correlation between population density and progressivism.

But there is more: California is home to two of the three best universities in the United States: Berkeley and Stanford, coupled with Harvard University in Massachusetts. These schools have studied this question, and they agree with the University of Edinburgh, that in order to have a frank discussion about racism, they must weed out the charlatans that would turn the discussion into a tribal dance and ruin it for all.

There is a difference between a reasonable discussion, and the shouts of political tribalists. The former is what the University of Edinburgh hopes to achieve, and the latter is what they hope to avoid. Y'all know what I'm talking about here...with certain people on this very forum, there is no possibility of having a reasonable discussion. They communicate in jingos, rhymes and bumber stickers. They are tribalists. If the University of Edinburgh lets that infection into their discussion, then all hope of a meaningful dialogue is lost.

by Maddog Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:37 pm

gelico wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I started looking at events from the black man's view, and I was amazed. They live in a prison, within open society, what with the bias, and the cops and the economic constraints. Your disinterest comes from having bigger fish to fry. But for the black man, there is no bigger fish to fry than the way they are treated by a predominately white majority society.

Quill, this is nonsense. None of the black people I know feel like that at all.

Do you even actually know any black people on a personal level?.

Do they really feel like this?

If so, maybe it's just a Californian thing

It's a Walter Mitty thing.

by gelico Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:43 pm

Original Quill wrote:
gelico wrote:

Quill, this is nonsense. None of the black people I know feel like that at all.

Do you even actually know any black people on a personal level?.

Do they really feel like this?

If so, maybe it's just a Californian thing

Do you feel you must have black friends in order to vindicate your views? Do you think, knowing that you are so adverse to their view, that they would tell you? You are already into your own tribalism. Blacks are just like whites in that they know when to pick their fights. To try to tell you, of all people, how they really feel would be fruitless.

I daresay you have never had this conversation with a black person. Look at yourself. There is no way that you would ever accept what I, or the black man is saying. The discussion has metastasized into tribal positions. Given that degree of things, do you think a black person would even bother to have this discussion with you?

Progressiveism is certainly a California thing in that California is the most progressive state in the US. California is also the most populous state in the US, and surely you know that there is a strong correlation between population density and progressivism.

But there is more: California is home to two of the three best universities in the United States: Berkeley and Stanford, coupled with Harvard University in Massachusetts. These schools have studied this question, and they agree with the University of Edinburgh, that in order to have a frank discussion about racism, they must weed out the charlatans that would turn the discussion into a tribal dance and ruin it for all.

There is a difference between a reasonable discussion, and the shouts of political tribalists. The former is what the University of Edinburgh hopes to achieve, and the latter is what they hope to avoid. Y'all know what I'm talking about here...with certain people on this very forum, there is no possibility of having a reasonable discussion. They communicate in jingos, rhymes and bumber stickers. They are tribalists. If the University of Edinburgh lets that infection into their discussion, then all hope of a meaningful dialogue is lost.

My friends are based on who and what they are not what colour their skin is. I don't need anyone to validate my views

sorry if that comes as some sort of disappointment to you

5 paragraphs of waffle and you didn't answer my question at all. I'll ask again

Do you even actually know any black people on a personal level?.

Do they really feel like this?

I mean, seriously have any black friends of yours (if you have any) spoken to you and revealed that this is how they feel

be honest now (if you can)

Cool

by Original Quill Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:02 pm

gelico wrote:My friends are based on who and what they are not what colour their skin is. I don't need anyone to validate my views

sorry if that comes as some sort of disappointment to you

And yet, here you are using them for your own tribal arguments. I doubt they are truly your friends if the only role they play is as props in your script.

by Maddog Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:02 pm

Original Quill wrote:
gelico wrote:My friends are based on who and what they are not what colour their skin is. I don't need anyone to validate my views

sorry if that comes as some sort of disappointment to you

And yet, here you are using them for your own tribal arguments. I doubt they are truly your friends, if the only role they play is as props in your script.

What would you know about friends?

by Original Quill Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:04 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

And yet, here you are using them for your own tribal arguments. I doubt they are truly your friends, if the only role they play is as props in your script.

What would you know about friends?

To respond would be gratuitous.

by gelico Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:08 pm

Original Quill wrote:
gelico wrote:My friends are based on who and what they are not what colour their skin is. I don't need anyone to validate my views

sorry if that comes as some sort of disappointment to you

And yet, here you are using them for your own tribal arguments. I doubt they are truly your friends if the only role they play is as props in your script.

And yet, here you are desperately trying to deflect from the questions by making up shit

tut tut quill, i'm sure you can do better

i'll ask one last time then i'll just give up and assume the answer is 'no'

Do you even actually know any black people on a personal level?.

Do they really feel like this?

Have any of them spoken to you and revealed that this is how they feel?

try answering a question with a straight answer for once

Rolling Eyes

by eddie Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:52 pm

Quill, I think you do that thing whereby you kind of harbour some pride in liking black people and fighting their cause. You do know that to keep saying “Oh you poor blacks” is doing them a disservice? It’s patronising.

I’ve lived with black men and their families when I dated them. They don’t go on about racism as much as you do!

by Ben Reilly Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:14 pm

Original Quill wrote:
eddie wrote:I just think he doesn’t understand racism too well....it’s my main (and only) bone of contention with him tbh.

I think what you are seeing is from your middle-of-the-road perspective. Whites don't recognize racism; blacks see nothing but racism. I personally feel that blacks have a better grasp on reality.

Two years ago your husband was about to declare that racism is over. Then, when Charlottesville happened, he was strangely silent. All I was saying, to myself, is...I told you so, but you wouldn't listen.

Denial is a psychological state (reduction of cognitive dissonance), but also the result of perspective, and the result of self-interest. You don't see the black man's perspective because you don't want to see it.

I have simply had enough of the mendacity. I started looking at events from the black man's view, and I was amazed. They live in a prison, within open society, what with the bias, and the cops and the economic constraints. Your disinterest comes from having bigger fish to fry. But for the black man, there is no bigger fish to fry than the way they are treated by a predominately white majority society.

But I think (brushing aside for the moment the huge, false assumptions you've made about me and my wife) that people here just want to know *how* you look at events from the black man's view. Like, which black men have helped you understand how they see things?

Okay, no more brushing -- I never declared racism over, I wasn't silent after Charlottesville, and eddie has told me about seeing black boys she hung out with beat up in police vans for no reason.

You need to stop assuming and stereotyping, really.

by Original Quill Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:24 pm

eddie wrote:Quill, I think you do that thing whereby you kind of harbour some pride in liking black people and fighting their cause. You do know that to keep saying “Oh you poor blacks” is doing them a disservice? It’s patronising.

I’ve lived with black men and their families when I dated them. They don’t go on about racism as much as you do!

The ultimate patronizing is you. I am nowhere near the University of Edinburgh. They are the ones carrying on this fight. The University of Edinburgh is a UK institution. I merely sympathize with their struggle.

Racism is real. It is over 400-years old. It's in our institutions. It's in the blood of white people. It exudes from the very sweat of white people. We are now in the reaction, to the reaction, to the reaction--whatever iteration this is--and that is what I hear from you white people. How dare you call me a racist! Yep, that's what I'm doing.

Is there a black person on this board? No more of, Some of my best friends are black. No more white people speaking for blacks. I guess the last on here was Mogadishu. So let's see, we are a bunch of white people...me, arguing for fairness for blacks. The rest telling me, Shhhh...shut up, and enjoy the white privilege. Sorry, I am not motivated by self-interest, but principles.

by eddie Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:25 pm

Bollocks. You assume that no one cares about racism but you. The point in this thread is that WHITE people aren't being allowed to speak - because they’re white.

Isn’t that racism? Are you really that ignorant? Seriously?

And you still never answered Gelico’s question.

by Original Quill Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:28 pm

eddie wrote:Bollocks. You assume that no one cares about racism but you.

Look around you. Do you see anyone besides me?

by Original Quill Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:32 pm

eds wrote:The point in this thread is that WHITE people aren't being allowed to speak - because they’re white.

And that is because white people are bullies, and like to shout down blacks who are merely trying to express their view.

Blacks have always been told: Shut up! We'll tell you when to speak, and what to say.

by Original Quill Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:37 pm

eds wrote:And you still never answered Gelico’s question.

Yes I did. She just never listened. This whole dialogue is an answer, as it has continued for two threads.

I've told you, whites are bullies when it comes to race. This whole discussion is evidence of that. I can take it. But imagine how blacks feel when confronted with this diatribe.

by eddie Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:44 pm

Original Quill wrote:
eddie wrote:Bollocks. You assume that no one cares about racism but you.

Look around you. Do you see anyone besides me?

I care. That’s why I speak up when I think something is racist.

LIKE THIS THREAD. Rolling Eyes

by Ben Reilly Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:46 pm

Quill, you're not the only one here who thinks racism is wrong. You do appear to be the only one here (at the present at least) who thinks that racism is only wrong when white people do it.

The goal is equality -- a society in which skin color doesn't matter. You don't achieve that by shutting anybody up.

You don't move society forward by living in the past -- and by that, I mean, you can't punish people of today for the sins of their ancestors.

Society has to stop being like a pendulum, swinging back and forth, favoring one group over another. True progress will be making everyone, including whites, on the same playing field.

I know institutional racism and white privilege exist -- I'm one of very few people here who will speak out about those things. I'm the furthest from a white supremacist you'll find here, but I will never say it's fair to shut someone up because of the color of their skin, *even* if that color happens to be white.

by Original Quill Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:24 pm

Ben wrote:Quill, you're not the only one here who thinks racism is wrong. You do appear to be the only one here (at the present at least) who thinks that racism is only wrong when white people do it.

And who in our world, has had slavery in the last 400-years? WTF advantage would blacks take from racism? The idea is ridiculous. The privileged cannot be discriminated against.

What we have here is a remedial measure, to meet the continuing effects of past racism. Remedial measures are not racist, but designed to level the playing field.

It's nonsense to say that privileged white people can be discriminated against. If that's discrimination, I like the deal the white folks get!

by eddie Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:00 am

Racial discrimination refers to discrimination against individuals on the basis of their skin colour, racial or ethnic origin.

Going by the above definition, can you tell me Quill, how this is NOT happening, at this Edinburgh university?

by Ben Reilly Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:20 am

Original Quill wrote:
Ben wrote:Quill, you're not the only one here who thinks racism is wrong. You do appear to be the only one here (at the present at least) who thinks that racism is only wrong when white people do it.

And who in our world, has had slavery in the last 400-years? WTF advantage would blacks take from racism? The idea is ridiculous. The privileged cannot be discriminated against.

What we have here is a remedial measure, to meet the continuing effects of past racism. Remedial measures are not racist, but designed to level the playing field.

It's nonsense to say that privileged white people can be discriminated against. If that's discrimination, I like the deal the white folks get!

That sounds like you're saying that a person whose voice has been silenced can't feel discriminated against if that person happens to be white. Do you not realize that all racism is experienced at a personal level?

While you're painting all people of a certain color with the same brush, there are white people who feel (right or wrong) that the system is tilted against them, that their voices don't count as much, because of slavery or Jim Crow or whatever. And telling them their voice doesn't count, won't be heard, does nothing to teach them tolerance or to value equality.

If black people were excluded from the esteemed school your father attended, the remedy would be to allow black people to attend -- not to kick YOU out because your father was favored.

You don't fix the inequality brought about by slavery by enslaving the children of the slave owners -- any more than you would punish the child of a man who was convicted of murder after his death and call that justice.

Jesus -- in this respect, you're just as mean as Old Testament God, punishing future generations for their ancestors' sins.

White privilege won't go away by putting white people down -- it will go away if we can stop institutions from favoring whites over other ethnic groups.

Telling a person they don't deserve to speak because of the color of their skin is wrong, full stop. You can't do that and say you believe all people are equal. And if you've twisted up your thinking so that you think it somehow is okay, you're just another racist.

by eddie Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:22 am

Ben said:

Telling a person they don't deserve to speak because of the color of their skin is wrong, full stop. You can't do that and say you believe all people are equal. And if you've twisted up your thinking so that you think it somehow is okay, you're just another racist.

Spot on!

by Original Quill Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:01 am

Ben wrote:That sounds like you're saying that a person whose voice has been silenced can't feel discriminated against if that person happens to be white. Do you not realize that all racism is experienced at a personal level?

Voice dimmed, busing, whatever...its all remedial action. It's not discrimination, it's leveling the playing field for prudential reasons.

by Original Quill Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:05 am

Ben wrote:If black people were excluded from the esteemed school your father attended, the remedy would be to allow black people to attend -- not to kick YOU out because your father was favored.

And that's the remedy that is being used here: disadvantaged people are being given first voice. No one is kicking anyone out...it's just a louder voice.

It's the same principle as Stanford giving the first chance at acceptance to a minority. With limited resources, someone is going to be left out.

And BTW, yes, my father was probably accepted into Harvard Medical School when better black students were left out. Remedial means making up for that...leveling the playing field.

by gelico Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:54 pm

LOL quill, you don't even know any black people

you would rather see black people as oppressed because you can't bear to think of them having their own minds and doing well for themselves

you specifically can't bear that any black would support trump

you are a total racist

and your stance is complete fakery

you're a charlatan plain and simple

lol!

by Maddog Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:32 pm

gelico wrote:

LOL quill, you don't even know any black people

you would rather see black people as oppressed because you can't bear to think of them having their own minds and doing well for themselves

you specifically can't bear that any black would support trump

you are a total racist

and your stance is complete fakery

you're a charlatan plain and simple

"Mitty is a meek, mild man with a vivid fantasy life. In a few dozen paragraphs he imagines himself a wartime pilot, an emergency-room surgeon, and a devil-may-care killer. Although the story has humorous elements, there is a darker and more significant message underlying the text, leading to a more tragic interpretation of the Mitty character. Even in his heroic daydreams, Mitty does not triumph, several fantasies being interrupted before the final one sees Mitty dying bravely in front of a firing squad. In the brief snatches of reality that punctuate Mitty's fantasies the audience meets well-meaning but insensitive strangers who inadvertently rob Mitty of some of his remaining dignity."

by Original Quill Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:53 pm

gelico wrote:

LOL quill, you don't even know any black people

you would rather see black people as oppressed because you can't bear to think of them having their own minds and doing well for themselves

you specifically can't bear that any black would support trump

you are a total racist

and your stance is complete fakery

you're a charlatan plain and simple

What's with all this we/they distinctions between you and blacks? It's classic me/other thinking. Why is is so important for you to cloak yourself in black friends and blackishness? If you truly had any feelings for anyone, you wouldn't isolate them and point to them like they were in a zoo.

by Original Quill Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:01 pm

Maddog wrote:"Mitty is a meek, mild man with a vivid fantasy life.

And you are a big, strong southerner who can take niggahs and drag their dead bodies behind your pickup truck until your drunken, meth-high wears off.

Thank you...I would rather be meek and mild, and deal with things in a moral and rational way.

by Maddog Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:20 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:"Mitty is a meek, mild man with a vivid fantasy life.

And you are a big, strong southerner who can take niggahs and drag their dead bodies behind your pickup truck until your drunken, meth-high wears off.

Thank you...I would rather be meek and mild, and deal with things in a moral and rational way.

I'm done with you.

And Wolfie too.

Only so much room in my life for people that have problems like you.

by Original Quill Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:54 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

And you are a big, strong southerner who can take niggahs and drag their dead bodies behind your pickup truck until your drunken, meth-high wears off.

Thank you...I would rather be meek and mild, and deal with things in a moral and rational way.

I'm done with you.

And Wolfie too.

Only so much room in my life for people that have problems like you.

Thank god! I'm tired of responding to meth-induced ramblings from a racist southerner. Hopefully, your absence will invite a better class of participant.

by Guest Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:37 pm

gelico wrote:

LOL quill, you don't even know any black people

you would rather see black people as oppressed because you can't bear to think of them having their own minds and doing well for themselves

you specifically can't bear that any black would support trump

you are a total racist

and your stance is complete fakery

you're a charlatan plain and simple

100% agreed and he is racist beyond a shadow of a doubt to argue in favour of racial discrimination. Based on a methodology he does not ap-lly universially based on based wrongs. Its so hypocritical and absurd and shows how far the rregressive left have fallen

by Guest Thu Oct 03, 2019 6:04 pm

Original Quill wrote:If black people were excluded from the esteemed school your father attended, the remedy would be to allow black people to attend -- not to kick YOU out because your father was favored.

So based on your reasoning. The only people that should be allowed to speak based and only speak. Based on your warped and crazy point system of past and present hardship. Should be those with disabilities, mental health, and the Roma/gypsies?

Correct?[/quote]

by Victorismyhero Thu Oct 03, 2019 6:30 pm

given the sudden lack of cogency in quilss arguments, the lack of logic and cleart thinking, the loss of proportionality......

I'm getting quite worried....do we have the onset of dementia showing in him??

by Guest Thu Oct 03, 2019 6:42 pm

Victorismyhero wrote:given the sudden lack of cogency in quilss arguments, the lack of logic and cleart thinking, the loss of proportionality......

I'm getting quite worried....do we have the onset of dementia showing in him??

As much as i think Quill is brainwashed cultishly, that is a tad low mate

I will add also, that its providing an excuse for poor reasoning, by saying that he has a condition
You know I respect you loads Vic, but that is really poor.
Why not simple dismantle his really poor extreme views with sound reason.

by Original Quill Thu Oct 03, 2019 6:48 pm

Victorismyhero wrote:given the sudden lack of cogency in quilss arguments, the lack of logic and cleart thinking, the loss of proportionality......

I'm getting quite worried....do we have the onset of dementia showing in him??

You just have to look into 'remedial action' in matters of discrimination. The following article, in the context of US employment law, may be illustrative:

Reverse Discrimination and Remedial Affirmative Action in Employment : Dealing with the Paradox of Nondiscrimination

By Gullett, Carlos Ray

Public sector employers are governed by two standards in the design and application of voluntary remedial affirmative action plans: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended) and the equal protection provisions of the Constitution. Since these plans are subject to challenge under reverse discrimination claims, they must be carefully designed to avoid vulnerability to such charges under either a statutory or constitutional claim. However, the Supreme Court has interpreted the legal acceptability of voluntary affirmative action differently under the statute than under the Constitution. Title VII allows a more permissive standard than does the 14th or 5th amendments. An analysis and comparison of Court rulings under both standards illustrate these differences. To avoid successful challenge of a voluntary remedial plan, a public employer must abide by the more conservative criteria of the Constitution. In so doing, some kinds of remedial action available to those in the private sector is barred to their public sector counterparts. Further Court rulings may clarify these apparent differences.

Confronting the challenge of equal employment opportunity is a continuing and complex responsibility for all employers, particularly those in the public sector. Public agencies are expected to engage in fair employment practices that satisfy multiple objectives. Among the most important of these are (1) avoiding discriminatory treatment or impact against any individual or group, (2) redressing the effects of historical occupational exclusion, and (3) building a workforce that mirrors our increasingly diverse society. Since these objectives sometimes conflict with one another, both public and private employers often find that even their best efforts are vulnerable to legal attacks by concerned parties.

One important and growing area of contention is that of "reverse discrimination." This concept is based on the argument that majority group members are being illegally disadvantaged in employment opportunities because of affirmative action programs that are established to improve opportunities for traditionally underrepresented groups such as women and racial minorities.

Ironically, the legal underpinnings for affirmative action programs also form the basis for attacks upon them. In the public sector the primary justification for remedial employment policies comes from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended) and the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment to the Constitution of the United States (the due process clause of the 5th amendment for federal employment).

While both the statute and Constitutional amendments have been recognized by the courts as grounds for affirmative action, both have also been ruled as prohibitions against preferential employment practices in certain fact-specific situations. Compounding the problem is the possibility that what may be permissible under statutory law may be forbidden by the Constitution. For the public employer, the potential for legal liability may seem especially daunting regardless of the course of action taken.

Although greater clarification by the Supreme Court is needed, tentative guidelines for defensible affirmative action plans can nevertheless be developed through analysis of past court rulings. The following discussion should not be regarded as legal advice, but it attempts to reconcile the paradoxical issues of EEO, affirmative action programs, and reverse discrimination in the light of current court interpretation. To begin the analysis, a definition of affirmative action, the justifications for its use, and the focus of this paper are provided.

Affirmative Action in the Employment Setting

Affirmative action provides some consideration of a person's race, gender, or ethnicity in making decisions for selection, promotion, retention, or other personnel action. It is necessarily a group-directed process since its purpose is not to identify victims of past exclusion, but to engage in future-directed conduct that will result in greater inclusion of underrepresented groups.

https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-62303259/reverse-discrimination-and-remedial-affirmative-action

by Guest Thu Oct 03, 2019 6:50 pm

So based on an article, you think its okay to allow what it argues against?

Racial discrimination?

by gelico Thu Oct 03, 2019 7:00 pm

Original Quill wrote:
gelico wrote:

LOL quill, you don't even know any black people

you would rather see black people as oppressed because you can't bear to think of them having their own minds and doing well for themselves

you specifically can't bear that any black would support trump

you are a total racist

and your stance is complete fakery

you're a charlatan plain and simple

What's with all this we/they distinctions between you and blacks? It's classic me/other thinking. Why is is so important for you to cloak yourself in black friends and blackishness? If you truly had any feelings for anyone, you wouldn't isolate them and point to them like they were in a zoo.

there is no distinction between me and blacks. there is no me/other thinking.

that's what you do

and the bib is definitely what you do

away with your projections and your racism

you claim to know how black people feel and yet you don't even know any, much less communicate with any

foolish virtue signalling is all you can do

it doesn't work quill

by eddie Thu Oct 03, 2019 7:18 pm

Quill you are actually not even acknowledging that to discriminate against a group of people because of their colour is racist, and that’s what is happening to white people at this university. If you can’t see that then you are indeed, ignorant at best.

by Ben Reilly Thu Oct 03, 2019 7:19 pm

Quill, point blank, do you think it's justifiable to punish someone who's done nothing wrong personally, in the name of bringing justice to their ancestors?

by Original Quill Fri Oct 04, 2019 4:41 am

Ben Reilly wrote:Quill, point blank, do you think it's justifiable to punish someone who's done nothing wrong personally, in the name of bringing justice to their ancestors?

Punishment has no part in the issue. It's totally remedial.

by 'Wolfie Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:13 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

And you are a big, strong southerner who can take niggahs and drag their dead bodies behind your pickup truck until your drunken, meth-high wears off.

Thank you...I would rather be meek and mild, and deal with things in a moral and rational way.

I'm done with you.

And Wolfie too.
.
Only so much room in my life for people that have problems like you.
.

University of Edinburgh is accused of 'blatant racism' for hosting an equality conference where white people are BANNED from asking questions - Page 2 3489511464

You're the biggest problem on here, you uneducated dolt...

How about you get a proper education, Dopey Dawg, before spouting more of your idiotic redneck dross on subjects you obviously know less than zero about..

by nicko Fri Oct 04, 2019 4:24 pm

Civil and friendly debate , wolfie ,your a geranium and should be banned from any Forum !

by Original Quill Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:47 pm

eddie wrote:Quill you are actually not even acknowledging that to discriminate against a group of people because of their colour is racist, and that’s what is happening to white people at this university. If you can’t see that then you are indeed, ignorant at best.

Eds, the untold story here is that white people are discriminating right back against people of color. There are patterns of thought and/or belief that are well recognized and accepted. When those patterns are pitted against innovative, or at least unrecognized thoughts or beliefs, they prevail by shear weight. Alexis de Toqueville called this the tyranny of the majority. Alexis de Toqueville, Democracy in America (1835). Some have called it repressive tolerance: "...the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed." Herbert Marcuse, Repressive Tolerance (1965).

We may call this simply, the 'shout down'. The idea is that common thoughts or beliefs convey a sense of self-righoutousness, which leads the holder (and other listeners) to shout down holders of newer or unrecognized beliefs. There are many interactive ways to 'shout down' the lesser voice, including repeating the hackneyed idea, or simply issuing moral reproval. Vic’s form of ‘shout down’ is to question the senility of the speaker. Others simply raise their eyebrows in incredulity, as does Ben. The point is that there is a bias toward the already accepted and branded ideas, and when they go up against less recognized brands they prevail simply by weight of bias.

Elimination of racism isn’t new (hence my careful choice of words), but it is the lesser voice. It has been marginalized by no less a 'shout down' than the US Supreme Court, which has held that racism is ended. Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529 (2013). Turning to the University of Edinburgh example, in order to have a conference in which honest ideas and opinions about racial equality are expressed and digested, we must eliminate, or at least dull the 'shout downs’. In this sense, giving the podium to black voices is remedial and limited, as it is merely giving a moment’s quietude while the ideas are given birth, and/or deliberated upon, by fair and independent minds.

by Guest Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:26 pm

eddie wrote:Quill you are actually not even acknowledging that to discriminate against a group of people because of their colour is racist, and that’s what is happening to white people at this university. If you can’t see that then you are indeed, ignorant at best.

Because Quill fails to understand what racism is. He only sees this through a one lens view of colour and bases this of a small fraction of history and goegraphically. Not only is this illogical. Its endorsing racism. To say because of wrongs in the past and by some people in the present. That people should not be treated qually in society to have a voice, but that voices must be prioritised based on racial bases. Its the worst form of bigotry and smacks of the worst forms of racism

He is trying to do the worst whataboutism going to endorse racism here. Even worse failing to see that even his own views would be silenced in this arena. It would not matter what he thinks here, because he would not have a voice being white. This is a sign of self flagellation. Arguing to discount his own self having an equal voice in society. In fact if we used the illogical and racism stance by this convention. None on here would have a view based on the racist inequality of Quill.

His view around self-righteousness, has to go down as one of the really dumbest view points he has made as he is basically judging people again based on their skin colour, as if they hold such a position.

This is the reality we face today. We have people like quill you have no comprehension of how to fight racism, but making sure that racism continues to thrive. He is a person that lives in perpetual guilt over nothing he is done and even worse thinks everyone should bow down to his cultish ideology

I used to respect the guy and had many great debates in the past, but we now live in a time, where some people are so ashamed of who they are. They are willing to drag down everyone with them.

by Sponsored content