Conquer Club

FabledIntegral wrote:When 90% of your population is white - it's not a double standard to be labeled as a racist if you exclude all minorities. It's an ignorant statement to even try and disclaim being white would soon become a minority. The entire reasoning for such associations isn't to say "screw you other people, we don't like you," rather, "we have a very limited group of people and are spread out sparsely, so this organization will make it easier to come together." If they are doing for the initial reason - they are just as much racists indeed - but that is not the purpose, or the stated purpose at least.

We all know racism is still extremely rampant in "civil" society although I would assume white people haven't experienced it as much (and "knowing" it exists is hardly the same as experiencing it yourself, and yes I'm labeled as a minority and have experienced racism, in public places and at school). Things such as reverse discrimination aren't for the reason of "getting back at whites," rather "helping out those that are currently in worse economic situations, a large reason due to previous conditions." It's more than blatantly obvious such measures were needed, and in many cases, although now disputed, are possibly still needed.

You know that what you're experiencing is nothing more than a sliver of what minorities faced - and studies show consistently that whites live in superior economic conditions than their minority counterparts (I'm not sure exactly about Asians + Middle Easterns, but it falls true with every other ethnic group). The inconvenience you face is still less than what current minorities are facing (generally of course), as your family's history most likely has not suffered from the economic barriers that theirs' did. And if your case is different - well such is expected as it's being done once again not to hurt you, but to help them.

thisislondon.co.uk wrote:It was only when he telephoned the council to complain that he was told the session had been privately booked for Muslim women.

brooksieb wrote:

FabledIntegral wrote:When 90% of your population is white - it's not a double standard to be labeled as a racist if you exclude all minorities. It's an ignorant statement to even try and disclaim being white would soon become a minority. The entire reasoning for such associations isn't to say "screw you other people, we don't like you," rather, "we have a very limited group of people and are spread out sparsely, so this organization will make it easier to come together." If they are doing for the initial reason - they are just as much racists indeed - but that is not the purpose, or the stated purpose at least.

We all know racism is still extremely rampant in "civil" society although I would assume white people haven't experienced it as much (and "knowing" it exists is hardly the same as experiencing it yourself, and yes I'm labeled as a minority and have experienced racism, in public places and at school). Things such as reverse discrimination aren't for the reason of "getting back at whites," rather "helping out those that are currently in worse economic situations, a large reason due to previous conditions." It's more than blatantly obvious such measures were needed, and in many cases, although now disputed, are possibly still needed.

You know that what you're experiencing is nothing more than a sliver of what minorities faced - and studies show consistently that whites live in superior economic conditions than their minority counterparts (I'm not sure exactly about Asians + Middle Easterns, but it falls true with every other ethnic group). The inconvenience you face is still less than what current minorities are facing (generally of course), as your family's history most likely has not suffered from the economic barriers that theirs' did. And if your case is different - well such is expected as it's being done once again not to hurt you, but to help them.

Using reverse racism is racist, for starters there is no such thing as reverse racism, just racism, nothing else, you can't say that white people haven't experienced racism that much, white on white situations have happened alot, With the Irish, Croats, Albanians, Bosniaks, Serbs, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Russians, Belarussians, Ukrainians, Jews and many many more being ethnic groups that have experienced racism on international and ethnic levels, Britain is changing rapidly look at this, check UK on wikipedia, here is a quote that backs my theory.

As of 2007, 22% of primary and 17.7% of secondary pupils at maintained schools in England were from ethnic minority families.

About my family? Economic barriers? My Grandparents had to share one single sized bed, and my when my dad was a baby he had to sleep in a spare drawer where you'd get your clothes out of (obviously it was taken out), but they worked hard (my grandad at one point having two full time jobs and 3 part time jobs), though my dad did have 4 other brothers but that shows you can't discriminate against people, you don't know their full story.

And if your case is different - well such is expected as it's being done once again not to hurt you, but to help them.

MeDeFe wrote:

thisislondon.co.uk wrote:It was only when he telephoned the council to complain that he was told the session had been privately booked for Muslim women.

Sounds to me like they had paid to rent the whole pool for that time, so what's the problem?

Backglass wrote:

MeDeFe wrote:

thisislondon.co.uk wrote:It was only when he telephoned the council to complain that he was told the session had been privately booked for Muslim women.

Sounds to me like they had paid to rent the whole pool for that time, so what's the problem?

BOOM! They PAID to rent the entire pool for a private swim/party.

Where is the racism in this again Napoleon?

Napoleon Ier wrote:It's symptomatic of a wider problem.

Napoleon Ier wrote:The fact they didn't pay, Manchester City Council had reserved the time for muslims specifically. It was a public pool.

Backglass wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:The fact they didn't pay, Manchester City Council had reserved the time for muslims specifically. It was a public pool.

A public pool that evidently allows people to book private sessions. Our public pool has sessions for private swim lessons. Now, even though it is a public pool, I can't demand that I be allowed to swim during this time period. I have to wait for the "open swim" time.

Paid or not...are you saying that if YOU booked this same pool for some function, say a private family reunion, and a bunch of your favorite people (any race other than your own) showed up wanting to infringe on your time...you wouldn't be the slightest bit angry?

The bottom line is that if Manchester is going to allow people to book private pool time, then it's just that (private) and shouldn't be a big deal. Or else don't do it in the first place...for anyone.

Napoleon Ier wrote:It sounds to me like the city council essentially put aside a private session just for muslim women. That's the outrage, and that's where I see the discrimination. Now, if they paid to have a private pool reserved, it's a different matter, but it sounds like they didn't, rather some PC labour councillor thought this "private" session would be a brilliant tribute to moolti-kulturalism.

Backglass wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:It sounds to me like the city council essentially put aside a private session just for muslim women. That's the outrage, and that's where I see the discrimination. Now, if they paid to have a private pool reserved, it's a different matter, but it sounds like they didn't, rather some PC labour councillor thought this "private" session would be a brilliant tribute to moolti-kulturalism.

Well then, if they simply bowed to a special interest group to the exclusion of everyone else (IE: I can't also book the pool for an Atheist Swim" ), then that is wrong and we agree.

<GASP! >

FabledIntegral wrote:

brooksieb wrote:

FabledIntegral wrote:When 90% of your population is white - it's not a double standard to be labeled as a racist if you exclude all minorities. It's an ignorant statement to even try and disclaim being white would soon become a minority. The entire reasoning for such associations isn't to say "screw you other people, we don't like you," rather, "we have a very limited group of people and are spread out sparsely, so this organization will make it easier to come together." If they are doing for the initial reason - they are just as much racists indeed - but that is not the purpose, or the stated purpose at least.

We all know racism is still extremely rampant in "civil" society although I would assume white people haven't experienced it as much (and "knowing" it exists is hardly the same as experiencing it yourself, and yes I'm labeled as a minority and have experienced racism, in public places and at school). Things such as reverse discrimination aren't for the reason of "getting back at whites," rather "helping out those that are currently in worse economic situations, a large reason due to previous conditions." It's more than blatantly obvious such measures were needed, and in many cases, although now disputed, are possibly still needed.

You know that what you're experiencing is nothing more than a sliver of what minorities faced - and studies show consistently that whites live in superior economic conditions than their minority counterparts (I'm not sure exactly about Asians + Middle Easterns, but it falls true with every other ethnic group). The inconvenience you face is still less than what current minorities are facing (generally of course), as your family's history most likely has not suffered from the economic barriers that theirs' did. And if your case is different - well such is expected as it's being done once again not to hurt you, but to help them.

Using reverse racism is racist, for starters there is no such thing as reverse racism, just racism, nothing else, you can't say that white people haven't experienced racism that much, white on white situations have happened alot, With the Irish, Croats, Albanians, Bosniaks, Serbs, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Russians, Belarussians, Ukrainians, Jews and many many more being ethnic groups that have experienced racism on international and ethnic levels, Britain is changing rapidly look at this, check UK on wikipedia, here is a quote that backs my theory.

As of 2007, 22% of primary and 17.7% of secondary pupils at maintained schools in England were from ethnic minority families.

About my family? Economic barriers? My Grandparents had to share one single sized bed, and my when my dad was a baby he had to sleep in a spare drawer where you'd get your clothes out of (obviously it was taken out), but they worked hard (my grandad at one point having two full time jobs and 3 part time jobs), though my dad did have 4 other brothers but that shows you can't discriminate against people, you don't know their full story.

Reverse racism is merely a term - you know exactly what it means and are choosing to be technical with terminology - forgive me for using its widely associated connotation instead of denotation.

To try to get to the actual point - I can't say much about how it happened in the UK, simply because I am very uninformed on UK history, only learning key history points as little emphasis was placed on your country during my basic education. Yet if it parallels the United States at all, yes there was white vs white racism, but the racism would quickly dissipate within a few generations - it was neither long lasting nor to the extremity that was experienced from non-white minorities. Yes - the Irish were nigh-hated... for a period of time... but they were still permitted in most establishments and given the same rights under the government as other whites. Other minorities were not granted the same rights.

You also clearly ignored the part of my post

And if your case is different - well such is expected as it's being done once again not to hurt you, but to help them.

I really don't care if your specific lineage had it hard - the law wasn't acted to inhibit you in any way - rather your family apparently failed to capitalize on what opportunities they had. Maybe such opportunities were little, but they were still larger than what it would have been if your family had been in the EXACT same situation yet black. And that is the point.

brooksieb wrote:

FabledIntegral wrote:

brooksieb wrote:

FabledIntegral wrote:When 90% of your population is white - it's not a double standard to be labeled as a racist if you exclude all minorities. It's an ignorant statement to even try and disclaim being white would soon become a minority. The entire reasoning for such associations isn't to say "screw you other people, we don't like you," rather, "we have a very limited group of people and are spread out sparsely, so this organization will make it easier to come together." If they are doing for the initial reason - they are just as much racists indeed - but that is not the purpose, or the stated purpose at least.

We all know racism is still extremely rampant in "civil" society although I would assume white people haven't experienced it as much (and "knowing" it exists is hardly the same as experiencing it yourself, and yes I'm labeled as a minority and have experienced racism, in public places and at school). Things such as reverse discrimination aren't for the reason of "getting back at whites," rather "helping out those that are currently in worse economic situations, a large reason due to previous conditions." It's more than blatantly obvious such measures were needed, and in many cases, although now disputed, are possibly still needed.

You know that what you're experiencing is nothing more than a sliver of what minorities faced - and studies show consistently that whites live in superior economic conditions than their minority counterparts (I'm not sure exactly about Asians + Middle Easterns, but it falls true with every other ethnic group). The inconvenience you face is still less than what current minorities are facing (generally of course), as your family's history most likely has not suffered from the economic barriers that theirs' did. And if your case is different - well such is expected as it's being done once again not to hurt you, but to help them.

Using reverse racism is racist, for starters there is no such thing as reverse racism, just racism, nothing else, you can't say that white people haven't experienced racism that much, white on white situations have happened alot, With the Irish, Croats, Albanians, Bosniaks, Serbs, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Russians, Belarussians, Ukrainians, Jews and many many more being ethnic groups that have experienced racism on international and ethnic levels, Britain is changing rapidly look at this, check UK on wikipedia, here is a quote that backs my theory.

As of 2007, 22% of primary and 17.7% of secondary pupils at maintained schools in England were from ethnic minority families.

About my family? Economic barriers? My Grandparents had to share one single sized bed, and my when my dad was a baby he had to sleep in a spare drawer where you'd get your clothes out of (obviously it was taken out), but they worked hard (my grandad at one point having two full time jobs and 3 part time jobs), though my dad did have 4 other brothers but that shows you can't discriminate against people, you don't know their full story.

Reverse racism is merely a term - you know exactly what it means and are choosing to be technical with terminology - forgive me for using its widely associated connotation instead of denotation.

To try to get to the actual point - I can't say much about how it happened in the UK, simply because I am very uninformed on UK history, only learning key history points as little emphasis was placed on your country during my basic education. Yet if it parallels the United States at all, yes there was white vs white racism, but the racism would quickly dissipate within a few generations - it was neither long lasting nor to the extremity that was experienced from non-white minorities. Yes - the Irish were nigh-hated... for a period of time... but they were still permitted in most establishments and given the same rights under the government as other whites. Other minorities were not granted the same rights.

You also clearly ignored the part of my post

And if your case is different - well such is expected as it's being done once again not to hurt you, but to help them.

I really don't care if your specific lineage had it hard - the law wasn't acted to inhibit you in any way - rather your family apparently failed to capitalize on what opportunities they had. Maybe such opportunities were little, but they were still larger than what it would have been if your family had been in the EXACT same situation yet black. And that is the point.

Ever heard of no blacks, no dogs, no Irish? My point proven. Although the government didn't use racist laws in the UK, it didn't say it was illegal either, so privately owned businesses were allowed to discriminate against ANYBODY!