Student's Union Anti-Racism Meeting, Whites Not Permitted

[RootsBooster 24]

I consider myself to be a fairly balanced person when it comes to politics and ideals.

When I read about the following I felt it should be discussed, as I am interested in other peoples' opinions on such matters in this age of ever morphing societal values and principles.

 

The Sheffield Students' Union is holding meetings next Monday (14/10/19) to discuss how  they can "create an anti-racist Students’ Union".

From the web page here:  "Please note that these sessions are only open to black and minority ethnic (BME) students." 

While it doesn't specifically state it, this effectively only excludes white people, which (like it or not) is racial discrimination.

 

Yes, white privilege can be a thing and yes, most racism is from white people. Racism against white people is also a thing though, and so is discrimination.

By excluding a racial demographic from this meeting they are not building any bridges, quite the opposite, it is causing a division (intentional or not).

It's like holding a meeting to tackle domestic violence but only permitting women to attend.

 

In their own words, "A Bit Racist Is Still Racist"

 

EDIT: I realise this is sensitive subject matter and would prefer if certain people didn't just use it as a platform to vent their own racist views, thus getting the thread locked/removed. To those people, I am not your ally or sympathiser.

Edited October 11, 2019 by RootsBooster

[alchresearch 214]

Their loss.  I would (and have) stand by any person of colour if they're being discriminated against, just like many others who marched and protested for Black Lives Matter below:

 

[tinfoilhat 11]

Bigger question, are student unions currently racist? I'm no expert, but they seem to bend to every minority, be it racial, religious, etc etc at the drop of a hat - which is fair enough.

 

But if this narrow group do come up with something I hope they don't applaud but use jazz hands instead.

[RootsBooster 24]

2 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

Bigger question, are student unions currently racist? I'm no expert, but they seem to bend to every minority, be it racial, religious, etc etc at the drop of a hat - which is fair enough.

 

But if this narrow group do come up with something I hope they don't applaud but use jazz hands instead.

There have been a couple of racist incidents that made the news in past years (there was the banana incident most recently) but I have no idea of the less news-worthy racism incidents which may or may not be reported.

I think the goal is to tackle racism among students and the university environment in general, rather than just within the Union.

Edited October 11, 2019 by RootsBooster

[tinfoilhat 11]

1 minute ago, RootsBooster said:

There have been a couple of racist incidents that made the news in past years (there was the banana incident most recently) but I have no idea of the less news-worthy racism incidents which may or may not be reported.

But most unions are very careful that this shouldn't happen, hence it makes the news.

[RootsBooster 24]

Just now, tinfoilhat said:

But most unions are very careful that this shouldn't happen, hence it makes the news.

Sorry, I was adding to my post while you posted this

[tinfoilhat 11]

6 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

Sorry, I was adding to my post while you posted this

Gotcha.

 

Then really you want everyone on board if it's an education thing.  The whole thing is a bit odd.

[Jim Hardie 525]

RootsBooster, you're surely not surprised. Racial discrimination is not against the law in some circumstances. For instance, the NBPA is perfectly ok but a NWPA would not be.

[RootsBooster 24]

16 minutes ago, Jim Hardie said:

RootsBooster, you're surely not surprised. Racial discrimination is not against the law in some circumstances. For instance, the NBPA is perfectly ok but a NWPA would not be.

I don't think the name of an organisation matters too much, it's the admittance policy that counts. The NBPA does appear to bend the rules a little, although white people can become members they have a different status within the organisation. I'm not sure how that stands legally but it seems to be accepted.

This is  unrelated to the thread topic though.

 

(EDIT: There is pretty much a NWPA already, it's called the police force)

Edited October 11, 2019 by RootsBooster

[Tomm06 12]

2 hours ago, RootsBooster said:

I consider myself to be a fairly balanced person when it comes to politics and ideals.

When I read about the following I felt it should be discussed, as I am interested in other peoples' opinions on such matters in this age of ever morphing societal values and principles.

 

The Sheffield Students' Union is holding meetings next Monday (14/10/19) to discuss how  they can "create an anti-racist Students’ Union".

From the web page here:  "Please note that these sessions are only open to black and minority ethnic (BME) students." 

While it doesn't specifically state it, this effectively only excludes white people, which (like it or not) is racial discrimination.

 

Yes, white privilege can be a thing and yes, most racism is from white people. Racism against white people is also a thing though, and so is discrimination.

By excluding a racial demographic from this meeting they are not building any bridges, quite the opposite, it is causing a division (intentional or not).

It's like holding a meeting to tackle domestic violence but only permitting women to attend.

 

In their own words, "A Bit Racist Is Still Racist"

 

EDIT: I realise this is sensitive subject matter and would prefer if certain people didn't just use it as a platform to vent their own racist views, thus getting the thread locked/removed. To those people, I am not your ally or sympathiser.

Simple enough - They should be including everyone. 

[DerbyTup 10]

It would be interesting to know the reason they came to that decision?  On the face of it, it's discriminatory.  Usually, if you want to change something, it's best to get all the stakeholders together from the start of a project, so it seems a strange decision to take.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

2 minutes ago, DerbyTup said:

It would be interesting to know the reason they came to that decision?  On the face of it, it's discriminatory.  Usually, if you want to change something, it's best to get all the stakeholders together from the start of a project, so it seems a strange decision to take.

Presumably because there are some discussions that are made much easier by restricting who can attend. It is not racist and neither is the practice of female victims having women only groups to discuss personal experiences, especially violence and gaslighting.

 

Nothing to see here. Move on. 😁