The Royals
Comments
-
Yes that does happen from time to time, but it's usually an accident between two peers who typically see each other as equals.Pross said:
Who is playing the victim?shirley_basso said:I think the point he's making is that other than Ali G, people tend not to throw racism complaints around willy nilly and goes beyond calling a black person the n word.
Rather than playing the victim with your white privilidge, try to understand what the person is saying when they say they've experienced racism.
You could draw an analogy with all the abuse women have to deal with on a daily basis which has really been brought to the fore in the tragic case in the news just now. Every leering glance, every lewd comment, every time youre passed over for promotion, every time you work your censored off and someone else gets the credit etc etc. Doesn't seem like much as a one off but it's a lifetime of oppression and fear across an ENTIRE demographic - almost without exception.
The fact that one person *may* be accidentally called racist is a bit rich.
One could compare it to the *so what* attitude to those who die from flu each year because it's what society accepts.
Imagine society accepted a few people lost their job for false racism complaints but it meant eradicating racism?
Maybe I've gone off on one here.....
Taking race out of it altogether have you never experienced anyone misunderstanding something you've said and possibly taken offence as a result?
I won't give any flippant examples as someone will take that as me making a literal comparison.
What if you're constantly on the receiving end of a 'misunderstanding' (to use your words) due to your colour or gender or whatever....0 -
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver1 -
how about if it's only perceived to be colour or gender or you're projecting your own prejudices to announce a discrimination. Perhaps the discrimination claim is used maliciously to achieve your own objectives.shirley_basso said:
Yes that does happen from time to time, but it's usually an accident between two peers who typically see each other as equals.Pross said:
Who is playing the victim?shirley_basso said:I think the point he's making is that other than Ali G, people tend not to throw racism complaints around willy nilly and goes beyond calling a black person the n word.
Rather than playing the victim with your white privilidge, try to understand what the person is saying when they say they've experienced racism.
You could draw an analogy with all the abuse women have to deal with on a daily basis which has really been brought to the fore in the tragic case in the news just now. Every leering glance, every lewd comment, every time youre passed over for promotion, every time you work your censored off and someone else gets the credit etc etc. Doesn't seem like much as a one off but it's a lifetime of oppression and fear across an ENTIRE demographic - almost without exception.
The fact that one person *may* be accidentally called racist is a bit rich.
One could compare it to the *so what* attitude to those who die from flu each year because it's what society accepts.
Imagine society accepted a few people lost their job for false racism complaints but it meant eradicating racism?
Maybe I've gone off on one here.....
Taking race out of it altogether have you never experienced anyone misunderstanding something you've said and possibly taken offence as a result?
I won't give any flippant examples as someone will take that as me making a literal comparison.
What if you're constantly on the receiving end of a 'misunderstanding' (to use your words) due to your colour or gender or whatever....
perhaps it would be better to hold both sides to the same level scrutiny and belief.
0 -
There's very little equality in evidence in the woke cancel culture. Just righteous indignation like the mob baying for the burning of the witches. How far we've come.elbowloh said:Can we stop with the woke stuff like it's some sort of out there, weird fad. It's just about being for diversity and equality, which is the law of the land.
0 -
What cancel culture? Still hearing lots of people spouting about all sorts of crap all over the place.david37 said:
There's very little equality in evidence in the woke cancel culture. Just righteous indignation like the mob baying for the burning of the witches. How far we've come.elbowloh said:Can we stop with the woke stuff like it's some sort of out there, weird fad. It's just about being for diversity and equality, which is the law of the land.
0 -
Let's realistically assume that's the exception rather than the norm. I can't think of a single person who has made a success of falsely accusing others of being racist or sexist. In the interests of balance, I of course concede there will be examples of it happening, much like white men lie, cheat and steal to get ahead as well (albeit can't really use the racism and sexism card).
I may be in a very little bubble, but I don't see a wave of black people or women riding high on a wave of false accusations of racism and sexism with white men being the victim here - more the other way around with black people and women generally being afraid of speaking up. The BLM and MeToo campaigns are pretty clear examples of that.
What's strange in all this - is that you don't seem to want to know or hear what it's like for someone else? Just presume that they are using their disadvantageous position to somehow game the system.
The key point to bear in mind is that white privilige is not an insult, it's a reminder to think - god, actually, that must be tough <- that's what 'woke' means. Just stopping to think about others who haven't had it so easy as white middle class, straight males, for whom the world was set up for and is controlled by.1 -
I read something interesting today. It said cancel culture isn't really cancel culture. It's more like 'consequences culture'.david37 said:
There's very little equality in evidence in the woke cancel culture. Just righteous indignation like the mob baying for the burning of the witches. How far we've come.elbowloh said:Can we stop with the woke stuff like it's some sort of out there, weird fad. It's just about being for diversity and equality, which is the law of the land.
2 -
how about black privilege or female privelage? these are real things with organisations in the public and private sector seeking to actively address perceived imbalance. does that not equate to a real current issue for white people or white men?shirley_basso said:Let's realistically assume that's the exception rather than the norm. I can't think of a single person who has made a success of falsely accusing others of being racist or sexist. In the interests of balance, I of course concede there will be examples of it happening, much like white men lie, cheat and steal to get ahead as well (albeit can't really use the racism and sexism card).
I may be in a very little bubble, but I don't see a wave of black people or women riding high on a wave of false accusations of racism and sexism with white men being the victim here - more the other way around with black people and women generally being afraid of speaking up. The BLM and MeToo campaigns are pretty clear examples of that.
What's strange in all this - is that you don't seem to want to know or hear what it's like for someone else? Just presume that they are using their disadvantageous position to somehow game the system.
The key point to bear in mind is that white privilige is not an insult, it's a reminder to think - god, actually, that must be tough <- that's what 'woke' means. Just stopping to think about others who haven't had it so easy as white middle class, straight males, for whom the world was set up for and is controlled by.</p>
0 -
❄david37 said:kingstongraham said:You're never abusive SF, I think that's probably why you don't get flagged.
David plays up to it, so I wouldn't worry too much about him.
now now just because you are threatened by people who think for themselves and don't follow woke thought doesn't mean they're abusive.
You're becoming a bit obsessed Graham chasing me round and abusing. If I was upset about it I might think I was being harassed ( Which of course I am). but I just move on imperiously.0 -
hahah the consequences of not being woke? how very liberal and also legitimising.shirley_basso said:
I read something interesting today. It said cancel culture isn't really cancel culture. It's more like 'consequences culture'.david37 said:
There's very little equality in evidence in the woke cancel culture. Just righteous indignation like the mob baying for the burning of the witches. How far we've come.elbowloh said:Can we stop with the woke stuff like it's some sort of out there, weird fad. It's just about being for diversity and equality, which is the law of the land.
The problem with cancel culture is it changes and turns. It's also incredibly indulgent.
It's hard to find a period in history where this level of indulgence hasn't immediately preceded a break down in society and change in dominant culture.
0 -
Not really. If people require specific guidance and support on how to break through glass ceilings that's no bad thing. Remember they don't have lots of people they can look up to in Boardrooms and there is little trodden path for these types of people as it is the exception rather than the norm.
What's the expression "If you can't see me, then you can't be me".
Also, what do you mean by perceived imbalance. Are you saying that there *isn't* an imbalance in the workforce and black people and women are about right - 50:50 for women and men and then equally across other minorities?
I find it odd that you find this a concept which is hard to grapple with. Why don't you want to see others succeed? It's about making wholesale change to society, generally for the better.
Again - it goes back to Rick's earlier post calling out this type of behaviour 'yeah but what happens to the straight white male who is suddenly on the receiving end of distrimination'.
I think you said something about not being so chippy a page or two back, did you not? What's the problem?0 -
You mean like white males being indulged in being the dominant social group since forever and now things are changing?david37 said:
hahah the consequences of not being woke? how very liberal and also legitimising.shirley_basso said:
I read something interesting today. It said cancel culture isn't really cancel culture. It's more like 'consequences culture'.david37 said:
There's very little equality in evidence in the woke cancel culture. Just righteous indignation like the mob baying for the burning of the witches. How far we've come.elbowloh said:Can we stop with the woke stuff like it's some sort of out there, weird fad. It's just about being for diversity and equality, which is the law of the land.
The problem with cancel culture is it changes and turns. It's also incredibly indulgent.
It's hard to find a period in history where this level of indulgence hasn't immediately preceded a break down in society and change in dominant culture.
Also it's not the consequences of not being woke (woke isn't really an insult). It's the consequences of sharing unacceptable views in public.
You can hold unacceptable views and you can spout them to your hearts content. You just may find that your employer may not wish to be associated with those views, so be careful what platform you use to share them.1 -
So-called 'woke' and 'cancel' culture are likely to lead eventually to some fairly significant - and long overdue - changes in society, hopefully. If this forum is anything to go by, then the people who seem to be 'against' such changes are exactly the type of people I would expect to be against it.3
-
I see so your answer is to address the balance for the good of society by promoting people based on their recognisable characteristics as a starting point? Presumably that means another group A which has perhaps had greater representation needs to be diluted. this of course has the consequence that members of group A are lower priority on the basis of their racial or sex characteristics. that's discriminating today to change the politics of the past.shirley_basso said:Not really. If people require specific guidance and support on how to break through glass ceilings that's no bad thing. Remember they don't have lots of people they can look up to in Boardrooms and there is little trodden path for these types of people as it is the exception rather than the norm.
What's the expression "If you can't see me, then you can't be me".
Also, what do you mean by perceived imbalance. Are you saying that there *isn't* an imbalance in the workforce and black people and women are about right - 50:50 for women and men and then equally across other minorities?
I find it odd that you find this a concept which is hard to grapple with. Why don't you want to see others succeed? It's about making wholesale change to society, generally for the better.
Again - it goes back to Rick's earlier post calling out this type of behaviour 'yeah but what happens to the straight white male who is suddenly on the receiving end of distrimination'.
I think you said something about not being so chippy a page or two back, did you not? What's the problem?
How is society better in those circumstances?
0 -
No - I said that some people need more support to succeed as they may have deep insecurities and an inferiority complex, or imposter syndrome. It's not uncommon for successful black people and women to have felt like this - I see it among my connections on LinkedIn. That help, support and guidance may mean that suddently these people will be better position to be promoted and succeed whereas they weren't historically. That means the white male may find more competition for the same job role so needs to up his game. If he doesn't up his game, he doesn't get promoted.
What's the issue here? Generally speaking, if you are a good performing individual, all companies provide guidance and an appraisal process to help you get promoted. - so what if others need a bit more support.
Also - if some imbalance the other way is required to rebalance the scale, I can get over that - mind you, I don't get worried about seeing generally oppressed people being given an opportunity.
1 -
SB, you have been hooked and are getting reeled in.0
-
I know.orraloon said:SB, you have been hooked and are getting reeled in.
What my internal battle is trying to meet my wokeness with the fact that ultimately, I can't actually beleive the bullsh!t stunt H&M just played. It's obscene - whether i beleive the claims or not. The who situation is impossible to wrap your head around.
- I agree with Rick's points about wanting to leave the UK
- Harry seemed to be doing well (out of the public eye save for his charity and generally positive royal duties).
- All of a sudden he gets married to Meghan and the wheels fall off. Is it cause and effect or did the press hate Megan already and Harry was doomed to fail?
- It seems that Meghan is a diva. She seems to have no friends, alienated her own family (although her dad clearly has mental issues).
- Her naivety about the position she is in is mindblowing - royal duties, trying to become a celebrity - and the fact that Harry also thinks the interview is a good idea after the Prince Andrew debacle is insane.
That said - the press's treatment of them has been abhorrent.
I just don't understand how Harry has got himself into this position, and it gives me no joy in saying it - it just appears like it's Megan's fault.
And what's hilarious about all of this is the Royal family are providing protection to Andrew to paedo while leaving Harry to burn.
How did it ever get so bad within the family that he thought it was a good idea to air his dirty laundry in public?1 -
Very good, and yes I agree. I think that's the problem with social media and forums like this - people like that tend to be the most vocal (he says, rather ironically after writing lots of prose about it).ddraver said:Yeah, remember the pigeon on the chessboard SB...
That said - it's been an interesting exercise to get my thoughts, which are clearly not fully formed, down.0 -
Since he was young, Prince Harry has been very aware of the warmth that has been extended to him by members of the public. He feels lucky to have so many people supporting him and knows what a fortunate and privileged life he leads.
He is also aware that there is significant curiosity about his private life. He has never been comfortable with this, but he has tried to develop a thick skin about the level of media interest that comes with it. He has rarely taken formal action on the very regular publication of fictional stories that are written about him and he has worked hard to develop a professional relationship with the media, focused on his work and the issues he cares about.
But the past week has seen a line crossed. His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment. Some of this has been very public - the smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments. Some of it has been hidden from the public - the nightly legal battles to keep defamatory stories out of papers; her mother having to struggle past photographers in order to get to her front door; the attempts of reporters and photographers to gain illegal entry to her home and the calls to police that followed; the substantial bribes offered by papers to her ex-boyfriend; the bombardment of nearly every friend, co-worker, and loved one in her life.
Prince Harry is worried about Ms. Markle’s safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her. It is not right that a few months into a relationship with him that Ms. Markle should be subjected to such a storm. He knows commentators will say this is ‘the price she has to pay’ and that ‘this is all part of the game’. He strongly disagrees. This is not a game - it is her life and his.
He has asked for this statement to be issued in the hopes that those in the press who have been driving this story can pause and reflect before any further damage is done. He knows that it is unusual to issue a statement like this, but hopes that fair-minded people will understand why he has felt it necessary to speak publicly.
https://www.royal.uk/statement-communications-secretary-prince-harry
This is back in 2016. This has always been on the cards, given the situation never changed.0 -
I'm not unsympathetic to your list, although I think you are being a little harsh on Meghan.
At the end of the day for me though is that if we are to shrink/Streamline the monarchy a little, as Charles is reputed to want, then actually this is the sort of thing that is going to happen. The children low down the line of succession are going to have to go and make their own way in the world (as much as any child of a mega-rich family ever 'makes their own way' - but, that's not a monarchy problem, it's a capitalism problem).
On the whole, serving in a war zone, spending some time cutting ribbons, charity work and marrying a hot actress seems like a pretty decent way of achieving this.
Again, I'm left unable to see anything else here other than a self-obsessed media circle jerk about...really very little. They have made the, entirely reasonable, choice to leave all that behind and given up (by their standards) an awful lot. Yet the circus of shite has followed them...We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
I follow it all up to the third paragraph and then the final one.ddraver said:I'm not unsympathetic to your list, although I think you are being a little harsh on Meghan.
At the end of the day for me though is that if we are to shrink/Streamline the monarchy a little, as Charles is reputed to want, then actually this is the sort of thing that is going to happen. The children low down the line of succession are going to have to go and make their own way in the world (as much as any child of a mega-rich family ever 'makes their own way' - but, that's not a monarchy problem, it's a capitalism problem).
On the whole, serving in a war zone, spending some time cutting ribbons, charity work and marrying a hot actress seems like a pretty decent way of achieving this.
Again, I'm left unable to see anything else here other than a self-obsessed media circle jerk about...really very little. They have made the, entirely reasonable, choice to leave all that behind and given up (by their standards) an awful lot. Yet the circus of shite has followed them...
They were living in relative anonymity until they did the stupid baby photo and are now making things worse and worse.
Also isn't LA the paparazzi centre?
Yes the press are horrific - thanks Focus for your post.
So let's do a swan dive right into the jaws of the devil by airing all our shit on opera?
What on earth were they hoping? This is the bit I don't get. It's all absolute insanity. And I really want to give them the benefit of the doubt...and the perception is not good on Megan although I agree on reflection it does appear the press have hounded her out.
0 -
ddraver said:
I'm not unsympathetic to your list, although I think you are being a little harsh on Meghan.
At the end of the day for me though is that if we are to shrink/Streamline the monarchy a little, as Charles is reputed to want, then actually this is the sort of thing that is going to happen. The children low down the line of succession are going to have to go and make their own way in the world (as much as any child of a mega-rich family ever 'makes their own way' - but, that's not a monarchy problem, it's a capitalism problem).
On the whole, serving in a war zone, spending some time cutting ribbons, charity work and marrying a hot actress seems like a pretty decent way of achieving this.
Again, I'm left unable to see anything else here other than a self-obsessed media circle jerk about...really very little. They have made the, entirely reasonable, choice to leave all that behind and given up (by their standards) an awful lot. Yet the circus of shite has followed them...
Agree with much of what you say......the only addition is that Harry appears to feel that if he steps away from a frontline royal role (which he’s entitled to do, and I don’t blame him) the taxpayer should continue funding whatever security he requires (which is a ridiculous expectation IMO).0 -
shirley_basso said:
I follow it all up to the third paragraph and then the final one.ddraver said:I'm not unsympathetic to your list, although I think you are being a little harsh on Meghan.
At the end of the day for me though is that if we are to shrink/Streamline the monarchy a little, as Charles is reputed to want, then actually this is the sort of thing that is going to happen. The children low down the line of succession are going to have to go and make their own way in the world (as much as any child of a mega-rich family ever 'makes their own way' - but, that's not a monarchy problem, it's a capitalism problem).
On the whole, serving in a war zone, spending some time cutting ribbons, charity work and marrying a hot actress seems like a pretty decent way of achieving this.
Again, I'm left unable to see anything else here other than a self-obsessed media circle jerk about...really very little. They have made the, entirely reasonable, choice to leave all that behind and given up (by their standards) an awful lot. Yet the circus of shite has followed them...
They were living in relative anonymity until they did the stupid baby photo and are now making things worse and worse.
Also isn't LA the paparazzi centre?
Yes the press are horrific - thanks Focus for your post.
So let's do a swan dive right into the jaws of the devil by airing all our censored on opera?
What on earth were they hoping? This is the bit I don't get. It's all absolute insanity. And I really want to give them the benefit of the doubt...and the perception is not good on Megan although I agree on reflection it does appear the press have hounded her out.Ms. Winfrey revealed during the interview that she had spent about three years trying to land the exclusive. Along the way, she went into business with Meghan and her husband. Adding to the jumble of media alliances, the couple in 2019 cut a deal with Ms. Winfrey to produce a documentary series about mental health that is scheduled to stream on AppleTV+.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/09/business/media/oprah-meghan-harry-cbs.html
Of course you/we don't get it, you can't see it from their perspective.
0 -
Sorry - I dont understand your point. There is so much to be inferred from your post from both sides of the fence it's hard to know where that one sits!0
-
It's a shame you can't see it from my perspective.shirley_basso said:Sorry - I dont understand your point. There is so much to be inferred from your post from both sides of the fence it's hard to know where that one sits!
0 -
I still don't get it. Cynical me sees it all part of a PR ploy to build their value in the USA but that sort of flies in the face of everything Harry has ever said about being in the public eye - although I concede the US love them so it's not quite the same as over here (I'm guessing).0
-
It's just that it's futile trying to understand somebody else's life, you haven't lived it, aren't in it. Perhaps the media aspect got to them so much they decided to take control of it and make it work for them. I would imagine someone like Oprah could guide them on that and has the connections.0
-
But they are trying to help people understand their life by presenting it on opera - and in doing so making it more confusing.
Anyway - I get your point but it's all so bloody weird. And I cannot get my head around the conscious decision of a member of the royal family who's own mother was killed by the press - to air his family's dirty laundry on a television chatshow.
It's beyond belief.0 -
The difference is with Oprah, they were in control. That's very different from a paper publishing a story based on some long lens photography and some third hand gossip.shirley_basso said:But they are trying to help people understand their life by presenting it on opera - and in doing so making it more confusing.
Anyway - I get your point but it's all so bloody weird. And I cannot get my head around the conscious decision of a member of the royal family who's own mother was killed by the press - to air his family's dirty laundry on a television chatshow.
It's beyond belief.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0
