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

[RootsBooster 24]

18 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.

Absolutely

 

11 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Presumably because there are some discussions that are made much easier by restricting who can attend. It is not racist

It technically and literally is, even if that is not the intention. Or, to be more accurate, excluding a single race from a meeting about racism is racial discrimination in itself.

 

11 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

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. 😁

That would depend, if it's a meeting about domestic violence in general (as in my OP) then it would be discriminating to only permit women. If it was about domestic violence against women, it might be more understandable.

 

Edited October 11, 2019 by RootsBooster

[lil-minx92 10]

1 hour ago, Top Cats Hat said:

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. 😁

If you are restricting who can attend, based on race, it is a racist admission policy. That's a simple  fact. Whether its reasonable in the circumstances  or not is another issue

[Top Cats Hat 10]

54 minutes ago, RootsBooster said:

Absolutely

 

It technically and literally is, even if that is not the intention. Or, to be more accurate, excluding a single race from a meeting about racism is racial discrimination in itself.

 

That would depend, if it's a meeting about domestic violence in general (as in my OP) then it would be discriminating to only permit women. If it was about domestic violence against women, it might be more understandable.

 

It is not excluding a single race, it is excluding a number of races and ethnicities.

 

 

[RootsBooster 24]

1 minute ago, Top Cats Hat said:

It is not excluding a single race, it is excluding a number of races and ethnicities.

 

 

Such as?

[lil-minx92 10]

18 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

It is not excluding a single race, it is excluding a number of races and ethnicities.

 

 

If that were true could it not still be racist?

 

A 'whites only' bus policy would be excluding a number of races

[md1shp 10]

It appears to have disappeared now. I did read it before it changed.

 

[Top Cats Hat 10]

1 minute ago, lil-minx92 said:

If that were true could it not still be racist?

 

A 'whites only' bus policy would be excluding a number of races

If the intension was primarily to provide a safe space for people of certain ethnicities then no, it wouldn’t be racist in the same way that advertising for a black actor or Catholic teacher are exempt from discrimination legislation.

 

A ‘whites only’ bus policy on the other hand would be difficult to justify on any grounds.

[RootsBooster 24]

20 minutes ago, md1shp said:

It appears to have disappeared now. I did read it before it changed.

 

So it has, hopefully reason has prevailed and they will accept white applicants too.

17 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

If the intension was primarily to provide a safe space for people of certain ethnicities then no, it wouldn’t be racist in the same way that advertising for a black actor or Catholic teacher are exempt from discrimination legislation.

 

A ‘whites only’ bus policy on the other hand would be difficult to justify on any grounds.

The meeting about racism doesn't seem to be about providing a safe space for any minorities though, it seems to be about racism - something that happens to all races by one degree or another.

[Waj 0]

5 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.

Their choice I suppose. When you consider white people are far less likely to face any kind of racism then I guess it makes i little bit more sense.

For me personally though I agree with alchresearch, their loss.

[tinfoilhat 11]

25 minutes ago, Waj said:

Their choice I suppose. When you consider white people are far less likely to face any kind of racism then I guess it makes i little bit more sense.

For me personally though I agree with alchresearch, their loss.

By "white people" is this code for white British? Under the current regime I'd imagine white Europeans, particularly eastern Europeans are under increased risk of abuse. Yet, they wouldn't be welcome.

[Waj 0]

1 hour ago, tinfoilhat said:

By "white people" is this code for white British? Under the current regime I'd imagine white Europeans, particularly eastern Europeans are under increased risk of abuse. Yet, they wouldn't be welcome.

 

Thats a good point and not something i had considered.

[melthebell 863]

reading through the webpage i think rather than barring white people it seems more like they wanted to hear personal experiences of those that have suffered racism, in 99% of cases thats going to be black or BME people?

the webpage being changed maybe shows that they worded it a little clumsily?