Cancel Culture ?

[KateR]

I don't think it makes much sense to tell me I'm wrong, and then prove that I was right.
I never said it wasn't based on skin colour, I said that saying someone has benefited from white privilege is not characterising that person based on their skin colour. You have either misread or misinterpreted what I posted. If you would kindly quote the part of my post you misunderstood I will see if I can try to reword it so that others don't make the same mistake you made.

White privilege is not characterising someone based on their skin colour. White privilege is a term that describes how society treats white people better than non-white people.

it is and always has been based on skin colour, and that is where you are fundamentally wrong, that in itself is not a big issue, but trying to tell people of the back of the class to wake up, is. It's the equivalent of saying male privilege has nothing to do with males! The society you refer to is made up predominantly of white males and to be white and male makes you top of the privilege tree.

Extract:
All of us who are white, by race, have white privileges, although the extent to which we have them varies depending on our gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, age, physical ability, size and weight, and so on. For example, looking at race and gender, we find that white men have greater access to power and resources than white women do. The statistics from the 1995 Glass Ceiling Commission show that, while white men constitute about 43% of the work force, they hold 95% of senior management positions in American industry. Looking purely at white privilege, white women hold about 40% of the middle management positions, while Black women hold 5% and Black men hold 4%. Unless we believe that white women or African American men and women are inherently less capable, we have to acknowledge that our systems are treating us unequally.

White privilege has nothing to do with whether or not we are “good” people. We who are white can be absolute jerks and still have white
privileges; people of color can be the most wonderful individuals in the world and not have them. Privileges are bestowed on us by the institutions with which we interact solely because of our race, not because we are deserving as individuals.

[KateR]

If it's coming from me it's a slur, but I think terfs might be quite accepting of the term. It means Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist.

for me a terf is neither slur or insult, it's a description. I have not met many, in fact only one group in London, they were very proud of what they termed themselves, obviously a very small sampling. The fact it says radical in the terminology speaks volumes for me.

[android]

Ultimately that is the way to go. But it isn't happening and unless absolutely everybody is on board with it (and let's be honest, it's very obvious that isn't the case) then it isn't going to work.

It's a nice, utopian idea but when one group is starting from a position of inequality then just pretending everything is fine isn't really a solution.

The issue most people seemed to have with Fox's comments is that a white, middle class male isn't really ideally placed to be the arbiter of what is racist.

Thanks aggi. You seem to be the only "left wing liberal" on here (apologies if you don't consider yourself as such) with the confidence to agree that ignoring skin colour is even an acceptable way of defeating racism never mind a desirable way. Isn't that amazing and depressing in 2020? (I know Kate has expressed agreement but I think Kate is more from the centre politically or centre right perhaps from what I remember - thanks for your posts Kate).

I don't see it as utopian. Ambitious maybe. I know what you mean about Fox but to be fair I doubt he has never tried to set himself up as an arbiter.

A couple of thoughts. I have a bit of a nuanced view (shocking I know) of black lives matter (not so about BLM the political movement whose politics I don't like). In football, for example, I can see the blm message potentially doing some good but not in a particularly inspiring way. We have seen that football crowds do still possess some knuckle dragging racists and I think the movement could shut them up, which would be a result. Sadly though I don't see it actually changing minds. Then again the footballers did seem united and maybe a Ben Mee or a Raheem Sterling will inspire someone to see things differently.

However, I think most of our society didn't need telling that black lives matter and were already ahead of this. Focusing attention on skin colour makes me uncomfortable. Which brings me to something I saw on tv today. It was the 2 Liberal democrat leader contenders (who knew that has happening?!), a white BBC presenter and a black liberal democrat caller. It was excruciating. Among other things, the 2 contenders were falling over themselves to make it clear that they would make it compulsory for BAME representation on candidate shortlists. Last year it would have been a conversation between 4 people. Today it was very clearly a conversation between 3 white people tense with guilt and anxious not to say the wrong thing and one black person. And pity the sole BAME candidate on a shortlist who is there on merit but people inevitably believe is there on skin colour. I don't see that as progress.

[KateR]

I really try hard to see past skin colour and gender, plus other issues such as disabilities, I am often brought into diversity and inclusion issues from a business perspective. I certainly wasn't always like this and it took a long time but I finally decided it is, in the main, about personalities, those transcend race, gender etc. IMO,yet people do get radicalized on all sides. I am not better than anyone and am not virtue signalling, plenty of things I get wrong and could do better at, however some will see it that way and make accusations, just part of life's rich tapestry.

Definitely more centrist in my thinking (at least I think so), yet many will accuse me of being right, of being affiliated to one party, UK or USA, simply when I try to point out somethings I don't believe in, that may have been posted from someone with a different opinion.

While I agree seeing past skin colour is a laudable path forward, exactly the same as I would about gender, there are simply to many on both sides who will never adapt in the near term and as a consequence, I believe it is much more than ambitious, but in no way shape or form am I saying we shouldn't bother or try.

The bigger issue I have and have tried to explain in presentations and memo's etc is that many, not all, are moving to quota systems over a time period, consequently some people are being promoted or hired at the level of their incompetence, which we should all hope to achieve but not just to be put in that circumstance due to quotas.

In many of these issues/discussions/debates, what ever, we see the pendulum swing to far in a knee jerk reaction to the point in question, this leads to other more qualified candidates being left out in the cold, which I feel is wrong.

[android]

You are wrong on a fundamental level about what "White privilege" is and I have already responded to someone who was wrong in the same way you were. I didn't realise that I had to directly reply and quote you, but OK. For those at the back of the class I'll say it again. White privilege is not characterising someone based on their skin colour. White privilege is a term that describes how society treats white people better than non-white people.

This has been explained to people so many times by now, over the years, that at this point the only people who fail to understand are likely the racists who simply don't want to understand.

Since I'm sure you're not racist, and simply misunderstood because somehow no one has corrected you, that this is the last time anyone has to explain it to you.

You are a silly boy sometimes turtle! It will be obvious to most that I have always known what is meant by "white privilege". As hard as you try you can't take the white out of it.

I'm not sure how your mind will cope with learning that I lived for a while in a predominantly black country and also experienced black privilege in action. I haven't found either white privilege, black privilege or any other skin colour privilege attractive. It's just racism. I never thought we would attempt to eliminate white privilege by widening black privilege. Better by far to get along without worrying about skin colour at all.

I suppose it it must be easier to attempt a lecture than answer the difficult question I keep asking. Is the idea of tackling racism by deeming skin colour unimportant really such a hideous concept for you? Third time of asking. Maybe Fox was wrong about this being a tolerant country.

[PeterWilton]

White privilege is not characterising someone based on their skin colour. White privilege is a term that describes how society treats white people better than non-white people.

it is and always has been based on skin colour, and that is where you are fundamentally wrong, that in itself is not a big issue, but trying to tell people of the back of the class to wake up, is. It's the equivalent of saying male privilege has nothing to do with males! The society you refer to is made up predominantly of white males and to be white and male makes you top of the privilege tree.

Extract:
All of us who are white, by race, have white privileges, although the extent to which we have them varies depending on our gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, age, physical ability, size and weight, and so on. For example, looking at race and gender, we find that white men have greater access to power and resources than white women do. The statistics from the 1995 Glass Ceiling Commission show that, while white men constitute about 43% of the work force, they hold 95% of senior management positions in American industry. Looking purely at white privilege, white women hold about 40% of the middle management positions, while Black women hold 5% and Black men hold 4%. Unless we believe that white women or African American men and women are inherently less capable, we have to acknowledge that our systems are treating us unequally.

White privilege has nothing to do with whether or not we are “good” people. We who are white can be absolute jerks and still have white
privileges; people of color can be the most wonderful individuals in the world and not have them. Privileges are bestowed on us by the institutions with which we interact solely because of our race, not because we are deserving as individuals.

I'll try one more time, and if even after this you're still having trouble understanding what I'm saying then I've lost hope for you.

If I say that you have benefited from white privilege, I an NOT characterising YOU. I am not expressing ANY opinion about YOU. All I would be saying is that you have benefited from advantages and privileges given to white people BY SOCIETY that are not given to people of other races. I would be in no way whatsoever making any characterisation on you based on the colour of your skin or based on anything else whatsoever, because I would not be characterising you whatsoever.

Do you understand?

[PeterWilton]

You are a silly boy sometimes turtle! It will be obvious to most that I have always known what is meant by "white privilege". As hard as you try you can't take the white out of it.

I'm not sure how your mind will cope with learning that I lived for a while in a predominantly black country and also experienced black privilege in action. I haven't found either white privilege, black privilege or any other skin colour privilege attractive. It's just racism. I never thought we would attempt to eliminate white privilege by widening black privilege. Better by far to get along without worrying about skin colour at all.

I suppose it it must be easier to attempt a lecture than answer the difficult question I keep asking. Is the idea of tackling racism by deeming skin colour unimportant really such a hideous concept for you? Third time of asking. Maybe Fox was wrong about this being a tolerant country.

Erm. Yes. White privilege is racism. So is black privilege. Any privilege afforded to a people based on their skin colour is racism. It's really weird to me that you are arguing with me about this if you agree with me.

[PeterWilton]

You are a silly boy sometimes turtle! It will be obvious to most that I have always known what is meant by "white privilege". As hard as you try you can't take the white out of it.

I'm not sure how your mind will cope with learning that I lived for a while in a predominantly black country and also experienced black privilege in action. I haven't found either white privilege, black privilege or any other skin colour privilege attractive. It's just racism. I never thought we would attempt to eliminate white privilege by widening black privilege. Better by far to get along without worrying about skin colour at all.

I suppose it it must be easier to attempt a lecture than answer the difficult question I keep asking. Is the idea of tackling racism by deeming skin colour unimportant really such a hideous concept for you? Third time of asking. Maybe Fox was wrong about this being a tolerant country.

"Is the idea of tackling racism by deeming skin colour unimportant really such a hideous concept for you?"

I am absolutely certain that nothing I have ever said in my entire life can be fairly characterised as me expressing the opinion that making skin colour unimportant is" hideous".
I haven't seen the first two times you asked this question but until you word it in a way that isn't a thinly veiled attempt at calling me racist you won't be getting the direct, albeit blindingly obvious, answer from me that you want.

[KateR]

I'll try one more time, and if even after this you're still having trouble understanding what I'm saying then I've lost hope for you.

If I say that you have benefited from white privilege, I an NOT characterising YOU. I am not expressing ANY opinion about YOU. All I would be saying is that you have benefited from advantages and privileges given to white people BY SOCIETY that are not given to people of other races. I would be in no way whatsoever making any characterisation on you based on the colour of your skin or based on anything else whatsoever, because I would not be characterising you whatsoever.

Do you understand?

Peter,
you are a very good example of a white privileged male in full deniability as to what it is about, if you were not white you would not be classed in that group by society. By the very essence of being white you are privileged, I am at a loss as to what it is you find so difficult to understand.

I am white, I am privileged by my birth right/place/parents, I didn't ask for it but I am, however I am not as privileged as you because you are (I assume by your name) a male, you can't change that, you didn't make it happen but you are. However, the whole discussion is around you trying to convince people that being white has nothing to do with it, same as you other assertion that with trans, gender has nothing to do with it, it has everything to do with it. When I say these things, don't think for one minute that when I say you are more privileged than I am, that I want to in any way shape or form change places with you because I don't but you need to stop living in your on little bubble and accept so many people of all colours totally disagree with your interpretation. You have had examples of people telling you of black privilege, I can also evidence after living in numerous Arab countries that whites, as defined by the skin colour have privileges behind the local populace and there is a pecking order solely based on skin colour, which has a well known hierarchy that is also based in law, at least we as "whites" don't have privileges that relate to that in the same way.

I and millions/billions of people look at your skin colour and say you are privileged, I am most definitely characterising You/Me, we are privileged, I have evidenced this to you from others, providing excerpts from wiki and other analysis of this, it's not just Kate and a couple of others telling you how wrong you are. If society sees/judges privilege but doesn't base it on race/skin colour, what is the privilege based on and why do they call it "WHITE" privilege or MALE privilege?

Do you understand now?

If not pick any social media platform, put a quick post/blog out there, tell people who you are, skin colour, gender and ask people to vote whether you are white and privileged plus a male and privileged, easy to do with survey monkey, let me know the results

[RingoMcCartney]

You are a silly boy sometimes turtle! It will be obvious to most that I have always known what is meant by "white privilege". As hard as you try you can't take the white out of it.

I'm not sure how your mind will cope with learning that I lived for a while in a predominantly black country and also experienced black privilege in action. I haven't found either white privilege, black privilege or any other skin colour privilege attractive. It's just racism. I never thought we would attempt to eliminate white privilege by widening black privilege. Better by far to get along without worrying about skin colour at all.

I suppose it it must be easier to attempt a lecture than answer the difficult question I keep asking. Is the idea of tackling racism by deeming skin colour unimportant really such a hideous concept for you? Third time of asking. Maybe Fox was wrong about this being a tolerant country.

The term "white privilege " is reprehensible. Not because some white people dont have privileges. Most people, regardless of their skin colour, can be seen to have privilege. It's a privilege to be young- you have potential. It's a privilege to be old - you may have accrued wealth. Living now as opposed to during periods of famine is a privilege. Geography - not living in countries where extreme weather allows a more reliable source of food.

The idea that you can target a particular ethnic group, with a collective crime. Regardless of the specific innocence or guilt of the constituent elements of that group. Is nothing more than abhorrent racism.

Let's see what this narrative can lead to.

The kulaks were successful farmers in 1920s / 30s Soviet Russia. They were the most productive part of the agriculture sector in Russia. They were virtually, all killed, raped or robbed by those calling themselves Socialists, who insisted that, cos theyd showed signs of wealth, they were criminals. One of the consequences of the prosecution of the Kulaks was the deaths of approximately 6 million Ukrainians through starvation.

The idea of collectively held guilt , whether its being apportioned to the individual , at the legal level ( 1920/30sSoviet Union). Or as a philosophical principle- "white privilege" is extremely dangerous.

It's precisely the sort of language that people who either looking for trouble, or fermenting trouble would push.

Now the term "majority privilege" is a far more accurate non-racist way to describe what we in the West and all over the globe experience. And you've touched upon it.

The way a country, any country, any where in the world is run, socioeconomicaly, must be beneficial to the majority and give them "privilege" to varying degrees. Otherwise, that particular way of doing things wont last.

Let's look at Japan. I think I'm right in saying that , monocultural Japan is demographically around 93% Japanese. The way the economy is run must benefit the majority who are Japanese. Where's the accusation and the attempt to apportion collective guilt on the majority having "Japanese privilege" or because it's been boiled down to simple skin colour, ",Yellow privilege"

You can say the same about India. The majority of Indians happen to have brown skin. Their economy benefits the majority , to varying degrees, and gives them "privilege" . Again, no attempt to apportion collective guilt on the majority having "Indian privilege" or because it's been boiled down to simple skin colour, "brown privilege"

In Europe the majority of the population are white. They dont benefit from "privilege" from the way their countries operate on a socioeconomic level because their skin colour is white . They enjoy privilege because, just like their counterparts in Japan or India, they're the majority

The term "white privilege" is divisive Othering. Its setting one ethnic group against others. Its resentment fuelling finger pointing and is saying that one homogeneous ethnic groups status has only been achieved at expense of others.

A cursory glance at 20th century history will show you that. The application of guilt to the individuals of a group, some of the characteristics of that group which is based on their racial identity, leads to a very , very dark place.

[PeterWilton]

Peter,
you are a very good example of a white privileged male in full deniability as to what it is about, if you were not white you would not be classed in that group by society. By the very essence of being white you are privileged, I am at a loss as to what it is you find so difficult to understand.

EXACTLY!

[PeterWilton]

If I wasn't white my life in the UK would have been more difficult than it has been so far.

[bpgburn]

PW Wrote "Erm. Yes. White privilege is racism."

PW Wrote EXACTLY! in reply to "By the very essence of being white you are privileged"

So let me get this right, you are white privileged and white privilege is racist? hmmmmm.

[Bfcboyo]

If I wasn't white my life in the UK would have been more difficult than it has been so far.

Doubt it the way you go on with yourself , black or white your always right, always wronged , always biased .

Did you previously post and were you banned. As the similarities are now there for all to see. Like a Steven King chilling horror ITs back.

[PeterWilton]

PW Wrote "Erm. Yes. White privilege is racism."

PW Wrote EXACTLY! in reply to "By the very essence of being white you are privileged"

So let me get this right, you are white privileged and white privilege is racist? hmmmmm.

Yes. Society treats me better than it would if I was non-White. That is how white privilege works.

[bpgburn]

..So we are all racist by default?

[PeterWilton]

..So we are all racist by default?

[bpgburn]

Is that face because you have just realised you are racist?

[Bfcboyo]

Yes. Society treats me better than it would if I was non-White. That is how white privilege works.

I doubt it the way you are! In fact people would probably understand your viewpoint more if you had any sort of experience in any of your arguments. If you were for instance a black transexual people might listen to your views.

[PeterWilton]

Is that face because you have just realised you are racist?

I want to reply with "yes" but I'm worried that there is no way I can make my answer sarcastic enough that will prevent you from taking it seriously.

[claretonthecoast1882]

At least the obsession with Trump seems to have waned slightly under this username

[PeterWilton]

I doubt it the way you are! In fact people would probably understand your viewpoint more if you had any sort of experience in any of your arguments. If you were for instance a black transexual people might listen to your views.

Please. By all means listen to the experiences of black and trans people, instead of reading my utterances. I would ******* love it if more people did that. Then perhaps there'd be fewer racists and transphobes.

[bpgburn]

I want to reply with "yes" but I'm worried that there is no way I can make my answer sarcastic enough that will prevent you from taking it seriously.

Rest assured I take nothing you say or have said seriously...

[PeterWilton]

Rest assured I take nothing you say or have said seriously...

Having seen some of your replies I imagine you're incapable of taking anything you don't already agree with seriously.

[bpgburn]

Having seen some of your replies I imagine you're incapable of taking anything you don't already agree with seriously.

Nope, just what you say..

[Rileybobs]

Jeez, this is like pulling teeth. Peter has explained this very clearly, it really isn't difficult to understand. Most of you are agreeing with him but still arguing with him.

Bgpburn, maybe you need to read what was said again. I don't know why I'm bothering, but saying white privilege is racism doesn't in any way mean that someone who has benefited from white privilege is racist. I don't know how you can make that leap.

[NottsClaret]

Peter is right on racism. He's wrong on mistaking his misogyny for trans wokeness.

[bpgburn]

"Bgpburn, maybe you need to read what was said again. I don't know why I'm bothering, but saying white privilege is racism doesn't in any way mean that someone who has benefited from white privilege is racist. I don't know how you can make that leap."

No I couldn't possibly read anything he has said again.

BTW I thought it would have been pretty obvious to anyone with an ounce of common, that my comments on here have been purely for wind up purposes..

[Rileybobs]

"Bgpburn, maybe you need to read what was said again. I don't know why I'm bothering, but saying white privilege is racism doesn't in any way mean that someone who has benefited from white privilege is racist. I don't know how you can make that leap."

No I couldn't possibly read anything he has said again.

BTW I thought it would have been pretty obvious to anyone with an ounce of common, that my comments on here have been purely for wind up purposes..

No it seems pretty obvious that you jumped in and decided to play the man rather than the ball and got it spectacularly wrong.

[PeterWilton]

Peter is right on racism. He's wrong on mistaking his misogyny for trans wokeness.

Please quote what you think I have said that was misogynistic, and why it is misogynistic,and I will happy correct you without snark.

[bpgburn]

"No it seems pretty obvious that you jumped in and decided to play the man rather than the ball and got it spectacularly wrong."

No you are spectacularly wrong with your assumption and I very much doubt that is the first time. Very sweet though the way you felt the need to jump to his defence awwww x

[PeterWilton]

"No it seems pretty obvious that you jumped in and decided to play the man rather than the ball and got it spectacularly wrong."

No you are spectacularly wrong with your assumption and I very much doubt that is the first time. Very sweet though the way you felt the need to jump to his defence awwww x

Are you very young?

[bpgburn]

Are you very young?

Does that line work for you often?

[RingoMcCartney]

For those still insisting on the application of guilt to the individuals of a group, some of the characteristics of that group, which is based on their skin colour. By using the resentment fuelling, finger pointing, Othering term of "white privilege". Instead of using the accurate and non-racially loaded term "majority privilege". "Majority privilege" exists all over the world. It appears that only in the West does it appear to have been rebranded with added collective guilt.

It's now "progressive" to now judge people by their skin colour, and by what the ancestors of people with the same skin colour may have done.

They used to call that racism.....





A quick reminder.


"I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. "

Martin Luther King, Jr.

[martin_p]

For those still insisting on the application of guilt to the individuals of a group, some of the characteristics of that group, which is based on their skin colour. By using the resentment fuelling, finger pointing, Othering term of "white privilege". Instead of using the accurate and non-racially loaded term "majority privilege". "Majority privilege" exists all over the world. It appears that only in the West does it appear to have been rebranded with added collective guilt.

It's now "progressive" to now judge people by their skin colour, and by what the ancestors of people with the same skin colour may have done.

They used to call that racism.....





A quick reminder.


"I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. "

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Who’s being judged?

[PeterWilton]

Is Ringo a bot?

[TVC15]

..So we are all racist by default?

How do you reach the conclusion that anybody is saying that ?

[android]

Erm. Yes. White privilege is racism. So is black privilege. Any privilege afforded to a people based on their skin colour is racism. It's really weird to me that you are arguing with me about this if you agree with me.

Yes, it's good to agree. If I can get you to agree that the way to defeat racism is by ignoring skin colour is an acceptable opinion (even if you think there is another way) then that will be even better!

Where we differ is that people do not just use the term "white privilege" in the simple and narrow way you would like them to. The woman on QT was a case in point when she tried to silence Fox by describing him as "a white privileged male". The word "a" is significant in that phrase as is the attempt to silence.

And your acknowledgement that black privilege exists confirms that white privilege is not universal. Ringo has explained how it is usually "majority privilege" at work. I would go further and say that the current obsession with skin colour in this country is going to lead to pockets of both white privilege and black privilege. Ironically one of the areas where it seems highly likely that it will be an advantage to be black, if it isn't already, is as a UK actor (poor Fox!).

I agree with Ringo that the use of the term white privilege is very divisive and unhelpful. I fear the fixation with skin colour is going to set race relations back years after so much progress has been made. Hope I'm wrong.

[ksrclaret]

Well, it's not like bpgburn to make a complete and utter two hat of himself, only to come out with the line "I wasn't being serious" when found out.

[RingoMcCartney]

Who’s being judged?

A whole group of people based on their skin colour. While simultaneously groups with different skin colours in other part of the globe who enjoy identical "majority privilege " are not.

[PeterWilton]

Yes, it's good to agree. If I can get you to agree that the way to defeat racism is by ignoring skin colour is an acceptable opinion (even if you think there is another way) then that will be even better!

Where we differ is that people do not just use the term "white privilege" in the simple and narrow way you would like them to. The woman on QT was a case in point when she tried to silence Fox by describing him as "a white privileged male". The word "a" is significant in that phrase as is the attempt to silence.

And your acknowledgement that black privilege exists confirms that white privilege is not universal. Ringo has explained how it is usually "majority privilege" at work. I would go further and say that the current obsession with skin colour in this country is going to lead to pockets of both white privilege and black privilege. Ironically one of the areas where it seems highly likely that it will be an advantage to be black, if it isn't already, is as a UK actor (poor Fox!).

I agree with Ringo that the use of the term white privilege is very divisive and unhelpful. I fear the fixation with skin colour is going to set race relations back years after so much progress has been made. Hope I'm wrong.

You won't get me to agree to anything while you continue to falsely imply that it is something I once didn't agree to.


I really don't care how other people use the term "White privilege". Why should I? If someone like Ringo wants to use the term incorrectly, or interpret the term incorrectly, then why should I care, and why should I stop using it correctly just because his misinterpretation of the term leads huom to be offended when there isn't anything to be offended by were he to actually not deliberately misinterpret it?

I never said or implied that white privilege was universal? Why on earth do you think that's a point that needed to be made?

Yes, majority privilege could be an alternate term for it, but white privilege isn't the only majority privilege that exists, which means its not always adequate. But even so, why does it matter if its called white privilege or something else? What does the name of it matter? Why are people so offended by it being called white privilege in a predominantly white country? And why are these people who are offended by it always the same people who complain about how easily people are offended these days?

Anyway, I couldn't give a **** if you, Ringo, or anyone is offended by white privilege being called white privilege. Get a grip of yourselves and stop being so easily offended would be my advice.

[Heathclaret]

Yes. Society treats me better than it would if I was non-White. That is how white privilege works.

A customer of mine, he is half Bangladeshi ( father ) and half Bulgarian, completely disagrees with you. His parents came to Britain when he was a young child as his father was felt he would never be accepted in Bulgaria, and they both got jobs as engineers working for London Underground. To cut a long story short, my customer went to a decent school, worked hard, he praises the Headmaster as he was a disciplinarian, eventually working for Barclays selling mortagages. His parents decided the money that they had saved wasn’t working very hard for their retirement and my customer persuaded them to get into property to rent.

They now have a portfolio of over a hundred properties that they rent out. Some in the East Midlands, North West and London. He has his own thoughts on the problems of BAME people, and is adamant the colour of his skin has never got in the way of his progression. His parents both feel that they would never have got the same opportunities any where else. When we speak about the current issues, his views are not aligned with current trends.

I spoke to him about Devils Advocate listing me as a racist on this site, he thought it was very funny.

He’s an Arsenal fan.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

The fact he's an arsenal fan is his biggest problem.

[bpgburn]

How do you reach the conclusion that anybody is saying that ?

[ksrclaret]

I spoke to him about Devils Advocate listing me as a racist on this site, he thought it was very funny.

Brilliant

[martin_p]

A whole group of people based on their skin colour. While simultaneously groups with different skin colours in other part of the globe who enjoy identical "majority privilege " are not.

You’ll need to do better than that Wrongo! A whole group of people? Who are these people and what exactly is judgemental about what is being said about them. You can’t claim racism and then not be able to say what is being said.

[RingoMcCartney]

https://youtu.be/yxlh3BhaGbU

At 2 minutes in. Emma Barnett in full opinion silencing "white privilege " mode.

Enjoy.

[PeterWilton]

A customer of mine, he is half Bangladeshi ( father ) and half Bulgarian, completely disagrees with you. His parents came to Britain when he was a young child as his father was felt he would never be accepted in Bulgaria, and they both got jobs as engineers working for London Underground. To cut a long story short, my customer went to a decent school, worked hard, he praises the Headmaster as he was a disciplinarian, eventually working for Barclays selling mortagages. His parents decided the money that they had saved wasn’t working very hard for their retirement and my customer persuaded them to get into property to rent.

They now have a portfolio of over a hundred properties that they rent out. Some in the East Midlands, North West and London. He has his own thoughts on the problems of BAME people, and is adamant the colour of his skin has never got in the way of his progression. His parents both feel that they would never have got the same opportunities any where else. When we speak about the current issues, his views are not aligned with current trends.

I spoke to him about Devils Advocate listing me as a racist on this site, he thought it was very funny.

He’s an Arsenal fan.

Good for him. He's wrong though. Just because he doesn't thing he was hindered by societies attitude towards other races doesn't mean he wasn't. It just means he has done better for himself than he thinks he has.

[bpgburn]

Well, it's not like bpgburn to make a complete and utter two hat of himself, only to come out with the line "I wasn't being serious" when found out.

with your history you'd be best not commenting on anyone making a **** of themselves with the back pedalling you do, now move on there's a good lad..

[RingoMcCartney]

You’ll need to do better than that Wrongo! A whole group of people? Who are these people and what exactly is judgemental about what is being said about them. You can’t claim racism and then not be able to say what is being said.

You're trolling now Marty.

Read my earlier post made at 01.29. If you want to pretend you dont understand my point of use of the racist term "white privilege" that's your call.