London Black Lives Matter Protest | Page 30 | Vital Football

London Black Lives Matter Protest

  • Thread starter Deleted member 13556
  • Start date
There in lies the problem.
Anyone who doesn’t agree with those views is just a nasty racist.
No discussion
No opinion allowed
Just a nasty racist.
Bigotry is alive and well in the U.K..
Left bigotry
Right bigotry
Anarchist bigotry
There’s enough to go round.

Anyone who doesn't agree with what views?
 
Such views, you said 😁

That's not right though. Disagreeing with me doesn't make someone a racist. And discussing whether or not the diversity of ethnicity in adverts accurately reflects the statistical information relating to ethnicity in the population doesn't make someone a racist.

But seriously, why would anyone make a conscious decision to count how many mixed race faces they could see during a ten minute as break?!

And even if you did notice, why would you bother mentioning it? So what if there are not so many white faces on the adverts? Why does it matter? What is the issue?

Do you disagree that there are people in this country who wish that this country and it's capital city were still populated predominantly by people with white skin?

And if you don't disagree with that, can't you see how these same people will use any opportunity to vent their frustration that society no longer finds those kind of views tolerable?

If you have love in your heart for people from all and any race, religion or nation then surely you're not bothered by who is in adverts?!

Maybe I've got this all wrong, fair enough if I have. You're no racist, shotshy, are you really bothered by who is in the adverts? If you are, why?
 
Last edited:
Advertising reflects many things but rarely the demographic distribution of society. Are the overwhelming majority of actors of average to less than average appearance, do homes depicted reflect the number in HMOs, poor quality housing etc, how many disabled people feature. Currently French ads seem to be having a lesbian moment. It's all about the audience that you are aiming at (how they might like to imagine themselves) and a general signalling of virtue, inclusivity and general niceness. In this bizarre world the internal combustion engine is green, cleaning products bring ecstasy, banks are family members and women outfight, outhink and generally see off men.

My father was telling me that adverts were full of people of colour fifty years ago. He thought it was part of a conspiracy so I guess the conspirators are either incompetent, or extreme gradualists.
 
Advertising reflects many things but rarely the demographic distribution of society. Are the overwhelming majority of actors of average to less than average appearance, do homes depicted reflect the number in HMOs, poor quality housing etc, how many disabled people feature. Currently French ads seem to be having a lesbian moment. It's all about the audience that you are aiming at (how they might like to imagine themselves) and a general signalling of virtue, inclusivity and general niceness. In this bizarre world the internal combustion engine is green, cleaning products bring ecstasy, banks are family members and women outfight, outhink and generally see off men.

My father was telling me that adverts were full of people of colour fifty years ago. He thought it was part of a conspiracy so I guess the conspirators are either incompetent, or extreme gradualists.

Good post, jo.
 
You should try the digital channels.

The bias there is towards those that want to pay in advance for their funeral plans or to have pure cremations - at least 50% of the adverts.

It's deathism, I say ! :death:
 
The woke left are out of touch with the population , we know that from election results.
Yet they continue to push full on diversity.
This is damaging society and will increase the perfectly natural fears of many people.
Expect to see growing support for the right , in all western countries.
If you try to change a country's culture without consultation and then stifle/suppress disagreement , then you must prepare for the consequences of those actions.
 
The woke left are out of touch with the population , we know that from election results.
Yet they continue to push full on diversity.
This is damaging society and will increase the perfectly natural fears of many people.
Expect to see growing support for the right , in all western countries.
If you try to change a country's culture without consultation and then stifle/suppress disagreement , then you must prepare for the consequences of those actions.
Except that "diversity" is yet another of those words that has been hi-jacked and re-defined by the left.

Genuine diversity of outlook can be a good thing - and is often promoted in the private sector.

But "diversity" based on skin-colour - which is the way it is presented by left-activists and their (lazy?) metro-media allies - is not merely simplistic, but highly divisive and often "racist".
They assume that all sharing the same skin colour think alike.
Not only is this patronsing, it is collectivist (i.e. disrespecting the individual).

As a (darker-skinned) entrepreneur put it.
"We value diversity amongst our staff.
But if we had an African, Asian, Chinese, and European all from Eton, they wouldn't be very "diverse"
."

Which is something most genuine free-market, colour-blind, profit-seeking capitalists would agree with...
...yet capitalists are deemed "right wing".

...Which confuses the hell out of the average Guardian reader, trained to believe that "right wing" just a step away from "far right". :oops:
 
I’m probably an average Guardian reader and I can differentiate between right wing and far right.
I agree that unfortunately some people can’t.
Some in our Party are so far left that they consider Blair/Brown as far right.
Still, as long as it’s a broad church etc,
We’ve had Teresa May and now effing Boris effing Johnson, and still can’t make an impact.
The world has turned upside down and we now have the Tories who were backing Cummings over his eye sight test now saying he’s a serial liar and those in Labour who were calling for his head now saying he’s Mother effing Teresa.
The reality is that he was a liar then and he’s probably still a liar now.
 
I’m probably an average Guardian reader and I can differentiate between right wing and far right.
I agree that unfortunately some people can’t.
Some in our Party are so far left that they consider Blair/Brown as far right.
Still, as long as it’s a broad church etc,
We’ve had Teresa May and now effing Boris effing Johnson, and still can’t make an impact.
The world has turned upside down and we now have the Tories who were backing Cummings over his eye sight test now saying he’s a serial liar and those in Labour who were calling for his head now saying he’s Mother effing Teresa.
The reality is that he was a liar then and he’s probably still a liar now.
Even liars tell the truth sometimes. I'd even extend that to Johnson. I'm no fan of Cummings obviously and I'm not quoting his testimony as if it is all true. However, substantial chunks of it were very believable. Nothing particularly new in what he said anyway. Hardly dramatic revelations. Much of it we knew or guessed anyway.

Had a laugh at a Johnson disciple on LBC phoning in raging at Cummings because he's a liar so everything he said must be false. However he could not accept that Johnson is also a proven liar (he has lost at least 2 jobs over it) and couldn't accept that therefore the same could be said of Johnson.

Why would telling a lie about Barnard Castle mean he is automatically lying about everything else?

I suspect everyone on this board has lied at some time in their lives yet I assume most of what people say is likely to be true.
 
Hancock and Johnson both said “We’re throwing a protecting ring around care homes”. Care home owner after care home owner came on the news to say that it was bollocks and that all the evidence was that residents were being discharged from hospitals into care homes without being tested. You didn’t need to be bloody Einstein to work out this was likely to be a death sentence for otherwise healthy residents. Cummings now simply confirms what everyone knew unless you believed that all the care homes owners who came in TV were liars.
 
One of the key qualities required for any senior job that might find you answering questions to camera is the ability to stare unflinchingly into camera and tell great big porkies. If you can look ever so slightly emotional and "genuine" then you are destined for great things. Who is the biggest liar is not a great contest and us poor suckers must make a calculated guess at the truth on a case by case basis.

There are lies and there is general nonsense, which is a close cousin. Under this file all the absurd fantasies of what the left, liberals, the woke are supoposed to be in favour of/against/guilty of. Cobble them together with any other groups you want to target and just let your imagination rip and you can then argue against yourself. It is a tired game that has lost its shine and can't justify the assaults on academic and cultural freedom, which the pygmies of Johnson's government are pursuing.
 
Last edited:
But seriously, why would anyone make a conscious decision to count how many mixed race faces they could see during a ten minute as break?!

And even if you did notice, why would you bother mentioning it? So what if there are not so many white faces on the adverts? Why does it matter? What is the issue?

This point is fair and I don't see why people would be bothered about it (it doesn't bother me), but do you apply the same logic and criticism to those in what I call the professional race/diversity industry who are obsessed with the lack of black and/or brown faces in pretty much everything?
 
This point is fair and I don't see why people would be bothered about it (it doesn't bother me), but do you apply the same logic and criticism to those in what I call the professional race/diversity industry who are obsessed with the lack of black and/or brown faces in pretty much everything?
That's pretty much my point ST.
It's claimed that minorities are under represented but that doesn't appear to be the case.
If anything , in advertising, it appears that they are over represented.
Does it bother me?
Not really.
Have I noticed and commented?
Yep !
Simple as that really.
It's just a fact.
 
This point is fair and I don't see why people would be bothered about it (it doesn't bother me), but do you apply the same logic and criticism to those in what I call the professional race/diversity industry who are obsessed with the lack of black and/or brown faces in pretty much everything?

In a way, Steve, yes, I do. Political correctness is something that really pisses me off. Not in the same way though, that I imagine it pisses you off!

I think and hope we would agree on these, what I would consider quite palpably obvious, assertions.

1. The highest powered and highest paid positions are usually occupied by white males, and consequently women and those with a different ethnicity are under represented.

2. Positions shouldn't be filled because of a gender or ethnicity bias/prejudice, instead they should be filled by those most suitable/competent. i.e. talent, experience etc.

There is a problem with number 2 though. It only works if there is a level playing field to start with. Otherwise, if there is not, you won't get a true and fair picture of who is best because some will have had a head start whilst others (through no fault of their own) have been held back.

For me, it is all about privilege and education. Until the privilege Is removed and everybody is properly educated, the bullshit will persist.

Although those who call for the positive discrimination in order to counter the lack of representation undoubtedly mean well, they're not really tackling the root of the problem.

The whole stinking shitstem needs replacing. Hence the political position that I tend to adopt generally.
 
Last edited:
In a way, Steve, yes, I do. Political correctness is something that really pisses me off. Not in the same way though, that I imagine it pisses you off!

I think and hope we would agree on these, what I would consider quite palpably obvious, assertions.

1. The highest powered and highest paid positions are usually occupied by white males, and consequently women and those with a different ethnicity are under represented.

2. Positions shouldn't be filled because of a gender or ethnicity bias/prejudice, instead they should be filled by those most suitable/competent. i.e. talent, experience etc.

There is a problem with number 2 though. It only works if there is a level playing field to start with. Otherwise, if there is not, you won't get a true and fair picture of who is best because some will have had a head start whilst others (through no fault of their own) have been held back.

For me, it is all about privilege and education. Until the privilege Is removed and everybody is properly educated, the bullshit will persist.

Although those who call for the positive discrimination in order to counter the lack of representation undoubtedly mean well, they're not really tackling the root of the problem.

The whole stinking shitstem needs replacing. Hence the political position that I tend to adopt generally.
Brilliant.
We can all agree that the system needs replacing.
Replaced with what ?
sensible answers only please.