Jump to content


What is equality to you?

Vaati

The bickering and insults can cease. You were warned by another mod only a few hours ago. Any further and accounts will be suspended.

Message added by Vaati

Recommended Posts

Just now, WiseOwl182 said:

By not recognising "positive action" as a euphemism for discrimination.

You mean not accepting your claim that "positive action" is a euphemism for discrimination?

 

That's not double standards.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

Heard it all before.

 

It's still nonsense and pretty tiring now.

 

 

 

It's the moralizing, self righteous 'white male savour' attitude towards the so-called  "disadvantaged" that's at risk of becoming tiring nonsense.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, danot said:

It's the moralizing, self righteous 'white male savour' attitude towards the so-called  "disadvantaged" that's at risk of becoming tiring nonsense.   

No ones moralising or bring self righteous.

 

no one can adequately explain why positive action is  discrimination.

 

other than say it prejudices a white person over a black person seemingly - bizarre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

I've no idea.

 

I'm guessing this is some scenario in your head.

 

Just have a look at

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85046/positive-action-recruitment.pdf

 

You should find all you're looking for in there.

 

Every scenario so far has been in our heads.  You've no idea who should be employed? Okay, I'll ask you this. Should not having any white employees give either candidate an advantage over the other or influence the boss's decision in any way?

10 minutes ago, makapaka said:

No ones moralising or bring self righteous.

 

no one can adequately explain why positive action is discrimination. 

 

other than say it prejudices a white person over a black person seemingly - bizarre.

Yet you're able to explain why discrimination is discriminatory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

 Do you really strive for equality or do you just hate white men?

I just try to strive towards equality. I think it's really illuminating that you use that phrase ''or do you just hate white men?'' though, it says a lot about your motivation. 

I don't hate white men at all, I'm one myself as was my father and his father, as are my brothers. Unlike yourself though, I have a realistic understanding of the way that the world - and our corner of it in particular - is largely run by and set up for white men.  I know that institutional racism is real and limits other people's chances. I believe it's important that the police force for example, should reflect more accurately the communities they serve.  So the idea that a white man occasionally misses getting a job as an equally qualified black man gets it doesn't trouble me. Mr White, living as he does in a country largely run by and for people like him, will readily find work.

     You seem quite distressed by this idea, and frankly I'm struggling to see why - it's almost as if you have the mindset that a few non whites getting a fair crack of the whip equates to a war on white men. I wonder if you see feminism as a threat too? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SnailyBoy said:

We've been through this before, it's tiring.

 

No, they choose the candidate they wanted based on their aspirations for their workforce, in keeping with the Equality Act 2010.

 

As for your question, if the employer felt that white people were proportionally under represented in their company, and the candidates were equally qualified, etc.

 

Then yes, I would say that the employer would be justified in choosing the candidate who would meet their aspirations for a proportionally representative workforce.

 

 

 

 

By definition they are disadvantaging someone.

Let's say Amazon opened a new warehouse in Sheffield needing 100 people. They need GCSE English and Maths from any employee for warehouse work. They could calculate, all the staff need to be BAME, to balance out the overall UK company ethnicity profile. Eg 100 prospective white people are disadvantaged by the legal option for Amazon to do that.

In my opinion that is morally wrong, and will cause more division than exists now.

The way to end inequality is for everyone to act in an equal way to all people. NOT to artificially engineer situations to give advantage to one group over the other.

Claiming that you can give advantage to one set of people and it not affecting anyone else is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, woodview said:

By definition they are disadvantaging someone.

Let's say Amazon opened a new warehouse in Sheffield needing 100 people. They need GCSE English and Maths from any employee for warehouse work. They could calculate, all the staff need to be BAME, to balance out the overall UK company ethnicity profile. Eg 100 prospective white people are disadvantaged by the legal option for Amazon to do that.

In my opinion that is morally wrong, and will cause more division than exists now.

The way to end inequality is for everyone to act in an equal way to all people. NOT to artificially engineer situations to give advantage to one group over the other.

Claiming that you can give advantage to one set of people and it not affecting anyone else is ridiculous.

We've been though this yesterday, it's getting tiring........again.

 

Inventing scenarios that suit your agenda adds nothing to the debate. Especially when you can't appear to grasp that equality doesn't advantage those that have the disadvantage.

 

Further information can be found below to help clear up any confusion you might have.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85046/positive-action-recruitment.pdf

Edited by SnailyBoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

We've been though this yesterday, it's getting tiring........again.

 

Inventing scenarios that suit your agenda adds nothing to the debate. Especially when you can't appear to grasp that equality doesn't advantage those that have the disadvantage.

 

Further information can be found below to help clear up any confusion you might have.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85046/positive-action-recruitment.pdf

Like a scenario where everyone is given £10...

 

But 'positive action' isn't equality, it's discrimination against a group of people on the grounds of race and sex.

Edited by leviathan13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, leviathan13 said:

Like a scenario where everyone is given £10...

Which was in response to your bizarre claims.

 

So what's my agenda?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, SnailyBoy said:

We've been though this yesterday, it's getting tiring........again.

 

Inventing scenarios that suit your agenda adds nothing to the debate. Especially when you can't appear to grasp that equality doesn't advantage those that have the disadvantage.

 

Further information can be found below to help clear up any confusion you might have.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85046/positive-action-recruitment.pdf

It is a scenario that exactly matches what we are talking about. Exactly the reason you won't talk about it. Sorry if it tires you. Good people being denied opportunities is tiresome too.

I don't have any confusion on what PA is. My scenario is legal and exactly the reason people are against it.

Will you respond to the posted scenario?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, woodview said:

It is a scenario that exactly matches what we are talking about. Exactly the reason you won't talk about it. Sorry if it tires you. Good people being denied opportunities is tiresome too.

I don't have any confusion on what PA is. My scenario is legal and exactly the reason people are against it.

Will you respond to the posted scenario?

No, you simply can't grasp that equality doesn't advantage those that have the disadvantage.

 

I went through scenarios yesterday, read those. Even one where I suggested that it could be justified that white people could be recruited using Positive Action, if they came from a disadvantaged group, as per the Equality Act 2010.

 

Frankly, it's getting boring now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SnailyBoy said:

No, you simply can't grasp that equality doesn't advantage those that have the disadvantage.

 

I went through scenarios yesterday, read those. Even one where I suggested that it could be justified that white people could be recruited using Positive Action, if they came from a disadvantaged group, as per the Equality Act 2010.

 

Frankly, it's getting boring now.

Who is more advantaged - someone from the middle class or someone from a single-parent family on a council estate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.