Re-examining and learning from history

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, wadesmith said:

'Apparently'..so you don'y know?. Ask your dad!

I only know what he told me. I wasn't physically present as I already pointed out. Again, really odd you'd think I'd go to the trouble of inventing it. He does work in an incredibly "woke" area so it's hardly the world's most unexpected or outlandish behaviour from the types of people he has to deal with. 

Edited 10 July, 2020 by hypochondriac

[wadesmith]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I only know what he told me. I wasn't physically present as I already pointed out. Again, really odd you'd think I'd go to the trouble of inventing it. He does work in an incredibly "woke" area so it's hardly the world's most unexpected or outlandish behaviour from the types of people he has to deal with. 

This pains me to admit, but I genuinely enjoy your posts!, i do find myself having a little chuckle sometimes. In these times of great stress they do sort of cheer me up! I logged on this morning, thinking' Let's see what he's typed now!' keep on keeping on fellah!

[hypochondriac]

Just now, wadesmith said:

This pains me to admit, but I genuinely enjoy your posts!, i do find myself having a little chuckle sometimes. In these times of great stress they do sort of cheer me up! I logged on this morning, thinking' Let's see what he's typed now!' keep on keeping on fellah!

That's interesting because I can't recall any of your posts beyond this conversation. Good to know I occupy your thoughts offline though. Maybe try to write something more memorable. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 minutes ago, wadesmith said:

This pains me to admit, but I genuinely enjoy your posts!, i do find myself having a little chuckle sometimes. In these times of great stress they do sort of cheer me up! I logged on this morning, thinking' Let's see what he's typed now!' keep on keeping on fellah!

God, you must lead a boring life. 

[badgerx16]

Looks like postings on this thread certainly don't exhibit any 'learning from history', at least in terms of not following the trend of previous topics and allowing the discussion to descend to Infant school playground taunting.

Edited 10 July, 2020 by badgerx16

[Turkish]

On 09/07/2020 at 13:35, Raging Bull said:

I didn’t say here was vitriol aimed at F1 drivers. I said that it would have been aimed at the massive organisations that have all fallen in line. 
 

what I said was pretty clear, but oh well 

I don’t particularly like Bernie Ecclestone but he gave a few great answers yesterday, which to be blunt are just common sense but seems like many are too scared to say.  Asked why there were so few black people in F1, what do you want an advert that says only black people can apply? If a person is talented enough they’ll get a job be that a driver, mechanic, pit crew or anywhere else. Then they said maybe they don’t apply because it’s so white dominated his reply was well they should, being black hasn’t stopped them being successful in other sports. 

[Wes Tender]

16 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

I'm not being selective, I haven't said it only applies to one side, you need to read more and stop acting on your prejudices. Normally people who scream hypocrisy don't care about the issue really or can't be arsed to argue the merits of their case, they just think a charge of hypocrisy is a winning hand.

I remember seeing a documentary on the far right and radical muslims, they were in groups a few meters apart both screaming 'pedophiles' at each other. Different but the same, they didn't or couldn't argue their case so went straight for what they perceived was a winning argument, 'we are right because you are pedophiles'. It was pathetic. Trying to spring a forum hypocrisy gotcha is desperate and more so when their example is so shit. 

I think that you ought to accept that most people express opinions based on their prejudices, you included. I think that you ought to stop generalising about hypocrisy and those accusing others of it. You haven't justified your claim that those who level charges of hypocrisy on the internet are desperate.

[rallyboy]

Ecclestone dismissed blacked-up people doing monkey chants as a minor thing.

If he also believes that black people will get the job if they're talented enough then the last few hundred years have passed him by.

He's a dinosaur, as well as many other things - perhaps not his fault as he is from the era before Love They Neighbour, but in 2020 he's best kept under wraps in the back of the garage.

 

[Lighthouse]

8 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

Ecclestone dismissed blacked-up people doing monkey chants as a minor thing.

If he also believes that black people will get the job if they're talented enough then the last few hundred years have passed him by.

He's a dinosaur, as well as many other things - perhaps not his fault as he is from the era before Love They Neighbour, but in 2020 he's best kept under wraps in the back of the garage.

 

The last few hundred years aren't relevant to getting a job today. That's like saying if you think the French navy aren't a threat and that women are allowed to vote, the last few hundred years have passed you by. I really can't imagine a black engineer not being given a job at an international F1 team because of his skin colour. A builder's merchant in Bradford, maybe but not an F1 team.

[Batman]

I notice the leader from BLM UK is front and centre in this situation...

Probably just a mis-understanding as this is not what BLM is all about!

 

Edited 11 July, 2020 by Batman

[revolution saint]

30 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

The last few hundred years aren't relevant to getting a job today. That's like saying if you think the French navy aren't a threat and that women are allowed to vote, the last few hundred years have passed you by. I really can't imagine a black engineer not being given a job at an international F1 team because of his skin colour. A builder's merchant in Bradford, maybe but not an F1 team.

I'm not sure why a F1 team is any different to a builder's merchant in Bradford?  Anyway, the point is that BAME people are under represented in many jobs.  In F1 Mercedes have said that only 3% of its workforce are BAME despite BAME people making up 14% of the (UK) population so there's a clear disparity for you.  Forbes found that black graduates are twice as likely to be unemployed as their white counterparts - why do you suppose that is?  I think the problem is that as a society we've largely eradicated overt racism but at the very least unconscious bias is still there and the stats bear this out.  We can't really hide from that anymore. 

So, we can moan about the forms protests take, the language being used or whether we should be forced to take a knee or not but it would be very difficult to deny the thrust of the argument which is that BAME people get a raw deal when compared to white people.  Anyway, I'm not having a go at you Lighthouse - your post just caught my eye. 

[Lighthouse]

26 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

I'm not sure why a F1 team is any different to a builder's merchant in Bradford?  Anyway, the point is that BAME people are under represented in many jobs.  In F1 Mercedes have said that only 3% of its workforce are BAME despite BAME people making up 14% of the (UK) population so there's a clear disparity for you.  Forbes found that black graduates are twice as likely to be unemployed as their white counterparts - why do you suppose that is?  I think the problem is that as a society we've largely eradicated overt racism but at the very least unconscious bias is still there and the stats bear this out.  We can't really hide from that anymore. 

So, we can moan about the forms protests take, the language being used or whether we should be forced to take a knee or not but it would be very difficult to deny the thrust of the argument which is that BAME people get a raw deal when compared to white people.  Anyway, I'm not having a go at you Lighthouse - your post just caught my eye. 

I don’t think it’s anything to do with colour, it’s just that different sports and industries attract different people. It’s no different to the white, upper middle class people of Surrey being grossly underrepresented in sports like boxing, greyhound racing or darts. Why do you never see a black jockey, how come they’re all Irish? Why are there no women F1 drivers.

 

I’ve been an F1 fan since the days Damon Hill was winning and I’ve been going to races semi-regularly for about 10 years. I would say the average punter sat in the crowd is a white male but I’ve yet to see any bouncers on the gates stopping women and blacks from getting in. It stands to reason the people pursuing a career in that sport would roughly reflect the audience.

[kyle04]

20 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

I'm not sure why a F1 team is any different to a builder's merchant in Bradford?  Anyway, the point is that BAME people are under represented in many jobs.  In F1 Mercedes have said that only 3% of its workforce are BAME despite BAME people making up 14% of the (UK) population so there's a clear disparity for you.  Forbes found that black graduates are twice as likely to be unemployed as their white counterparts - why do you suppose that is?  I think the problem is that as a society we've largely eradicated overt racism but at the very least unconscious bias is still there and the stats bear this out.  We can't really hide from that anymore. 

So, we can moan about the forms protests take, the language being used or whether we should be forced to take a knee or not but it would be very difficult to deny the thrust of the argument which is that BAME people get a raw deal when compared to white people.  Anyway, I'm not having a go at you Lighthouse - your post just caught my eye. 

It does seem a little odd that the BLM explosion is happening  following the death of a black American man at the hands of a white policeman. This is hardly a new occurance in the US , and what probably started out as a protest against (white ?) police brutality is now a general call for racial equality in all areas of society worldwide. I think its a noble but largely unachievable goal for many reasons.

The negative aspects of our society that stifle the progress of BAME men & women (social deprevation, "poverty", drugs, gang culture etc) affect white people as much if not more. If racism is now largely a subconcious reaction then it goes both ways and wont be eradicated any time soon. Is there a winner in these two scenarios :

1) You didn't get the job largely because of your skin colour, the employers a racist but insists there were more suitable candicates

2) You got the job largely because of your skin colour, the employer needs to fulfill diversity quotas and take their place among the woke worthies

People are not "equal" in this world, never have been and never will be. People have vastly different talents, or in my case no talent at all for anything much. The Marxist experiment tried in many countries has proved to be an utter failure and a disaster for the people involved, and spawned a political elite far more remote and unaccountable than anything a capitalist western culture has managed. I'd like to know just how the pure equality utopia is to be achieved, where by our very nature we are all competitive with the animal instinct for survival and self improvement, and yes, greed....

 

[hypochondriac]

Ah unconscious bias. The implicit association test is terribly flawed. For a start it's not repeatable and gives different results if the same subject repeats the test. Secondly there's no evidence whatsoever that pointing out so called unconscious bias (if that's actually what it is) has a demonstrably positive impact on behaviour and some evidence that it actually makes things worse. 

So for those who believe in unconscious racism, firstly how do we identify it? How can we say for certain that a 'bias' a test has identified is actually a bias? How do we prove that this bias affects the behaviour of the individual (bearing in mind there's some evidence to suggest there's not a correlation) and how do we measure to what extent a group being underrepresented in a profession is as a result of unconscious bias and not other factors such as different choices or a difference in competence among candidates? 

How come it's only the prestigious jobs that anyone seems to care about as well? You don't see anyone all over the media bemoaning for example the lack of female rubbish collectors or the proportionally lower number of black park keepers or male childcare workers. Presumably these disparities are also due to unconscious bias so why isn't there a more mainstream push to counter problems like that? 

Edited 11 July, 2020 by hypochondriac

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, Lighthouse said:

Why are there no women F1 drivers.

 

Because they have to park up after the race has finished? 

[revolution saint]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Ah unconscious bias. The implicit association test is terribly flawed. For a start it's not repeatable and gives different results if the same subject repeats the test. Secondly there's no evidence whatsoever that pointing out so called unconscious bias (if that's actually what it is) has a demonstrably positive impact on behaviour and some evidence that it actually makes things worse. 

So for those who believe in unconscious racism, firstly how do we identify it? How can we say for certain that a 'bias' a test has identified is actually a bias? How do we prove that this bias affects the behaviour of the individual (bearing in mind there's some evidence to suggest there's not a correlation) and how do we measure to what extent a group being underrepresented in a profession is as a result of unconscious bias and not other factors such as different choices or a difference in competence among candidates? 

How come it's only the prestigious jobs that anyone seems to care about as well? You don't see anyone all over the media bemoaning for example the lack of female rubbish collectors or the proportionally lower number of black park keepers or male childcare workers. Presumably these disparities are also due to unconscious bias so why isn't there a more mainstream push to counter problems like that? 

Hi Hypo, thanks for replying.  So if it isn't unconscious bias then what's the reason for under-representation?  I'm assuming here that you accept that there are organisations and pay levels where BAME are under-represented?  By the way, you seem to be under a bit of a misunderstanding about representation as a concept - those lower paid jobs would also have a fair representation of BAME employees (so in the case of the UK about 14%).  Given BAME people are under represented at higher pay levels then they're actually over represented at the lower and unemployed levels and so it's hardly surprising they're not calling out for more jobs of this kind.

As for how you tackle unconscious bias I'm afraid I don't have all the answers and wouldn't pretend to.  All I'm pointing out is that with regard to employment (in this case) BAME people are proportionally worse off than white people.  Hope that helps!

[Turkish]

23 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

How many black coaches are there in professional football in this country? Is it because non of them are good enough? Funny that only white people make good football coaches.

Yes, I worked for The Guardian and left 20 years ago so I can’t say what it is like now, but then there were no black people around. Yes I also worked for the CPS in Kent up to 6 years ago and there were some Asians but very few black people in our region. From memory there were 2 black prosecutors but no black support staff.

When you have extremes it is often the case that an opposite extreme happens before there is a balance. Whilst I don’t agree with the principle of positive discrimination, I can see the need for it until there is an evening up. There are plenty of jobs where black people could do them as well as white people, but it is very clear that they aren’t given the same opportunities if you look at the stats.

Football is a prime example. There are plenty of black players at the top level now, wouldn’t you expect to see more move into coaching positions? It’s not as if they aren’t interested.

If things are going to change for any minority groups, their voices need to be heard in positions of power and yes, in daily meetings where decisions are made.

The point where we reach proper equality will be when no one comments in the amount of minority groups in meetings or in positions of power. It would seem that is still a long way off.

 

Do you actually have any opinions of your own or are they all just what you read in the guardian? You’re a mimickry mate, your opinions are the opinions of someone else

now I see you’ve rolled out the “why aren’t there more black football managers?” Line that gets wheeled out on every racism discussion. heres  an idea, have a look at home many top black players were playing 15 years ago and see where they are now.  Take a look at the 2006 England squad for example and see how many of the top players, not just black players have become coaches or managers. Look at a few facts rather than just wailing what you think people want you to say. 

[hypochondriac]

55 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Hi Hypo, thanks for replying.  So if it isn't unconscious bias then what's the reason for under-representation?  I'm assuming here that you accept that there are organisations and pay levels where BAME are under-represented?  By the way, you seem to be under a bit of a misunderstanding about representation as a concept - those lower paid jobs would also have a fair representation of BAME employees (so in the case of the UK about 14%).  Given BAME people are under represented at higher pay levels then they're actually over represented at the lower and unemployed levels and so it's hardly surprising they're not calling out for more jobs of this kind.

As for how you tackle unconscious bias I'm afraid I don't have all the answers and wouldn't pretend to.  All I'm pointing out is that with regard to employment (in this case) BAME people are proportionally worse off than white people.  Hope that helps!

 

There's all sorts of reasons for one particular race being underrepresented in a profession, just as there's differing levels of representation across a host of jobs for men, women, straight people, gay people, Jewish people etc etc. I don't think it's particularly helpful to talk about unconscious bias being the problem just because a section of society is underrepresented in a particular profession. Do you not think there are other factors that could mean that a race is underrepresented that have nothing to do with so called unconscious bias? 

What do you mean by jobs of this kind? It seems like you're ranking the jobs market based solely on pay rates and then claiming unconscious bias because black people are underrepresented in higher paid jobs. I'm not sure how useful it is to lump all sorts of disparate jobs together purely based on pay level. There's a ton of lower paid jobs where lots of groups including black people are underrepresented. So is that due to unconscious bias as well or is there something else at play? 

It sounds like you don't really have any answers with regards to unconscious bias either than. So if there's a debate about its existence and certainly whether it improves things to actually 'discover' it then why are people expending so much energy trying to find it? Surely those energies would be better used elsewhere doing things that would actually make a tangible positive impact on the black community? Improving education would be a good idea as would dealing with the crisis of high levels of fatherlessness and the glamourosation of black culture. Dealing with those things just a little bit would do loads more to improve outcomes for black people than any amount of unconscious bias training ever could.

In my opinion and from experience, the biggest problems affecting long term outcomes is apathy from parents and a lack of proper guidance and abdication of parental responsibility. If we improve education for those who are lower class, tackle fatherlessnes and start to emphasise parental responsibility in the lives of children for all races then you're going to raise outcomes for all children but in particular children from black households. If we put all our energy into that then I'm confident that there would be greater levels of BAME representation but it's not going to happen and it's a better sticking plaster from a companies point of view to employ a quick fix and stick a few token black people onto their board, apologise for their unconscious racism that they didn't even know they had until five minutes ago and tick the diversity box. Be honest, what's easier? For society to collectively recognise the part we all have to play in bringing up young people properly and taking the proper steps to actually do that? Or for every company to mandate that their employees take unconscious bias training to identify their hidden original sin and learn about how they were always racist all along they just didn't know it yet?  Thank you for replying in a civil manner. 

 

Edited 11 July, 2020 by hypochondriac

[Manuel]

Equality of outcome is a poor social goal.  Better off trying to make sure everyone has access to whatever it is within society that engineers people towards success.  Things like equality of education, access to transport, access to technology, stable home life, healthy food, access to credit.  If you give people equality of opportunity in this way they should succeed.  It's in everyone's interest that they succeed.  What people won't do though, given the opportunity, is even themselves out proportionally in terms of gender, race, LBGT, for any role you can think of.  Attempting to engineer it so that it equals out is pointless and, in terms of all-women shortlists in elections for example, undemocratic.   

 

[revolution saint]

6 minutes ago, Manuel said:

Equality of outcome is a poor social goal.  Better off trying to make sure everyone has access to whatever it is within society that engineers people towards success.  Things like equality of education, access to transport, access to technology, stable home life, healthy food, access to credit.  If you give people equality of opportunity in this way they should succeed.  It's in everyone's interest that they succeed.  What people won't do though, given the opportunity, is even themselves out proportionally in terms of gender, race, LBGT, for any role you can think of.  Attempting to engineer it so that it equals out is pointless and, in terms of all-women shortlists in elections for example, undemocratic.   

 

I'd agree that equality of opportunity is a good starting position and both you and hypo are right about that.  I'd also argue that some degree of equality of outcome makes for a healthy society but that's another argument entirely.  However, how do you explain black graduates being twice as likely to be unemployed than white graduates?  These people presumably have had good parents, have got qualified and yet still lag behind - they can't all have been slightly worse than the white candidate.  In academia I think it's something like 16 - 18% of academics are BAME which is actually a higher representation than the 14% of the population so that's a bit higher than you would probably expect but they only make up 2.1% of senior positions.  Same with football - a higher representation when it comes to players but a pitiful level at the management and coaching levels.  I don't accept that it's because they're not attracted to these positions - it's that they don't get them (and they've had decent experience/qualifications/good parents).

You're right - you won't get a completely proportionate split on everything and at a micro level you will obviously see more pronounced differences due to the small numbers but as a country we should be doing much better.  It's too simple to blame this all on bad parents / poor opportunities because even when that isn't the case BAME people have worse outcomes.

As I say, I don't have the answers - no one has all of them but we can recognise that this is a problem and has been for decades.  It's all too easy to blame a lack of opportunity but that doesn't tell the whole story.

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, Manuel said:

Equality of outcome is a poor social goal.  Better off trying to make sure everyone has access to whatever it is within society that engineers people towards success.  Things like equality of education, access to transport, access to technology, stable home life, healthy food, access to credit.  If you give people equality of opportunity in this way they should succeed.  It's in everyone's interest that they succeed.  What people won't do though, given the opportunity, is even themselves out proportionally in terms of gender, race, LBGT, for any role you can think of.  Attempting to engineer it so that it equals out is pointless and, in terms of all-women shortlists in elections for example, undemocratic.   

 

Great Post. Agree completely. 

[Fan The Flames]

I wonder if the 'patriots' will come out and 'protect' the Trafalgar Square fountains

[Weston Super Saint]

26 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

I wonder if the 'patriots' will come out and 'protect' the Trafalgar Square fountains

'Protect' them from what?

[sadoldgit]

Some idiots apparently chanting Rule Britannia at the marchers supporting BLM in Brighton today. That’s the spirit!

[Jonnyboy]

10 hours ago, Turkish said:

I don’t particularly like Bernie Ecclestone but he gave a few great answers yesterday, which to be blunt are just common sense but seems like many are too scared to say.  Asked why there were so few black people in F1, what do you want an advert that says only black people can apply? If a person is talented enough they’ll get a job be that a driver, mechanic, pit crew or anywhere else. Then they said maybe they don’t apply because it’s so white dominated his reply was well they should, being black hasn’t stopped them being successful in other sports. 

Do you just fill out an application form to get an interview to be an F1 driver? 

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, Jonnyboy said:

Do you just fill out an application form to get an interview to be an F1 driver? 

You normally have stinking rich parents. 

[Jonnyboy]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

You normally have stinking rich parents. 

And therein lies the problem and answer. 

[Manuel]

4 hours ago, revolution saint said:

I'd agree that equality of opportunity is a good starting position and both you and hypo are right about that.  I'd also argue that some degree of equality of outcome makes for a healthy society but that's another argument entirely.  However, how do you explain black graduates being twice as likely to be unemployed than white graduates?  These people presumably have had good parents, have got qualified and yet still lag behind - they can't all have been slightly worse than the white candidate.  In academia I think it's something like 16 - 18% of academics are BAME which is actually a higher representation than the 14% of the population so that's a bit higher than you would probably expect but they only make up 2.1% of senior positions.  Same with football - a higher representation when it comes to players but a pitiful level at the management and coaching levels.  I don't accept that it's because they're not attracted to these positions - it's that they don't get them (and they've had decent experience/qualifications/good parents).

You're right - you won't get a completely proportionate split on everything and at a micro level you will obviously see more pronounced differences due to the small numbers but as a country we should be doing much better.  It's too simple to blame this all on bad parents / poor opportunities because even when that isn't the case BAME people have worse outcomes.

As I say, I don't have the answers - no one has all of them but we can recognise that this is a problem and has been for decades.  It's all too easy to blame a lack of opportunity but that doesn't tell the whole story.

I can't completely explain it either.  I've worked in a handful of industries and personally, my experience of employers is that they want the most competent person who will work the hardest, at a reasonable price, preferably a low price, but they couldn't care less about your appearance or background.  Business is quite ruthless in this respect.  I'm sure there must be some discrimination in employment but I suspect it's a small factor.  Unconscious bias, there has to be something in that.  My daughter gets her a-level Sociology book out and lectures me on stats regarding bias against BAME kids in schools.  Black kids being suspended more than white kids for the same offence.  Black kids being less likely to be put forward for higher streams of education despite having the same educational results thus far.  I can't explain it.  

[Lighthouse]

1 hour ago, Jonnyboy said:

And therein lies the problem and answer. 

In what way is it a problem? Rich people having fun in no way negatively effects the lives of the poor, however it may seem. It’s like the kid of some Russian oligarch having a yacht and Ferrari. Sure, it isn’t fair but if you take those things away from him it in no way makes my life any better, so what is there to complain about? To complain is plain and simple envy.

 

Racing at that level is basically just wealthy relatives an state sponsors being willing to chuck millions into a black hole, so some kid can go racing for fun. it isn’t a job.

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, Jonnyboy said:

And therein lies the problem and answer. 

Poor white people are excluded as well. 

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Poor white people are excluded as well. 

Poor people of any 'colour'.

[whelk]

The problem with the polarised camps. Weak fearful leadership stokes anger from the other side.

 

 

[whelk]

17 hours ago, kyle04 said:

It does seem a little odd that the BLM explosion is happening  following the death of a black American man at the hands of a white policeman. This is hardly a new occurance in the US , and what probably started out as a protest against (white ?) police brutality is now a general call for racial equality in all areas of society worldwide. I think its a noble but largely unachievable goal for many reasons.

The negative aspects of our society that stifle the progress of BAME men & women (social deprevation, "poverty", drugs, gang culture etc) affect white people as much if not more. If racism is now largely a subconcious reaction then it goes both ways and wont be eradicated any time soon. Is there a winner in these two scenarios :

1) You didn't get the job largely because of your skin colour, the employers a racist but insists there were more suitable candicates

2) You got the job largely because of your skin colour, the employer needs to fulfill diversity quotas and take their place among the woke worthies

People are not "equal" in this world, never have been and never will be. People have vastly different talents, or in my case no talent at all for anything much. The Marxist experiment tried in many countries has proved to be an utter failure and a disaster for the people involved, and spawned a political elite far more remote and unaccountable than anything a capitalist western culture has managed. I'd like to know just how the pure equality utopia is to be achieved, where by our very nature we are all competitive with the animal instinct for survival and self improvement, and yes, greed....

 

 

Recruiting  is tricky and generally everyone wants the best candidate 

I have to employ a lot of people and there is unconscious bias in any interview situation. I also see it in some of my managers - if the don’t have a university education they will often favour candidates with similar background and be more dismissive of qualifications  - they genuinely don’t see it as so important not that they are actively prejudiced.

I would love to have more female representation in my teams and would almost certainly favour a female over male candidate if they were close. 
Regarding BAME - The western interview sales pitch approach to interviews will favour some cultures over others not so groomed in ways of expressively telling anecdotes and endearing themselves socially with the panel.

Diversity on disablity is also an issue - absolutely need to be inclusive however HR would deny any acknowledgement that someone that needs ‘reasonable adjustments’  maybe more of an overhead and less productive as that would be so non-pc. So if a manager  has a small team judge on performance he would less likely go for someone with dyslexia or autism. It isn’t because they have no tolerance of disabilities (surprised that word hasn’t been purged by now).

I also see many shocking cvs and when you see these articles ‘I have applied for over a thousand roles etc’ and the person thinking it is prejudice on name or whatever it will morEh than likely be a v shit cv/cover letter that’s never going to be successful however many applications they submit. They need to play the survival game better not assume the world is against them.

 

 

[Weston Super Saint]

10 hours ago, Jonnyboy said:

And therein lies the problem and answer. 

Might as well add Polo in to the mix, maybe rowing and dressage too....

[hypochondriac]

8 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Poor people of any 'colour'.

Obviously. That's my point. 

[Turkish]

13 hours ago, Jonnyboy said:

And therein lies the problem and answer. 

Are there no rich black people then? How very racist of you!

 

by the way they weren’t just talking about drivers it was the entire sport, mechanics, pit crew, etc. Unlike you to miss the point though. 

[hypochondriac]

4 hours ago, whelk said:

 

Recruiting  is tricky and generally everyone wants the best candidate 

I have to employ a lot of people and there is unconscious bias in any interview situation. I also see it in some of my managers - if the don’t have a university education they will often favour candidates with similar background and be more dismissive of qualifications  - they genuinely don’t see it as so important not that they are actively prejudiced.

I would love to have more female representation in my teams and would almost certainly favour a female over male candidate if they were close. 
Regarding BAME - The western interview sales pitch approach to interviews will favour some cultures over others not so groomed in ways of expressively telling anecdotes and endearing themselves socially with the panel.

Diversity on disablity is also an issue - absolutely need to be inclusive however HR would deny any acknowledgement that someone that needs ‘reasonable adjustments’  maybe more of an overhead and less productive as that would be so non-pc. So if a manager  has a small team judge on performance he would less likely go for someone with dyslexia or autism. It isn’t because they have no tolerance of disabilities (surprised that word hasn’t been purged by now).

I also see many shocking cvs and when you see these articles ‘I have applied for over a thousand roles etc’ and the person thinking it is prejudice on name or whatever it will morEh than likely be a v shit cv/cover letter that’s never going to be successful however many applications they submit. They need to play the survival game better not assume the world is against them.

 

 

It has. The term is differently abled. 

[wadesmith]

Why are there no black swimmers? Swimmings cheap...& every city in England had got a pool. All you need is a pair of trunks and a nose clip.

Edited 12 July, 2020 by wadesmith

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, wadesmith said:

Why are there no black swimmers? Swimmings cheap...& every city in England had got a pool. All you need is a pair of trunks and a nose clip.

Physiology.  The same way that the top sprinters are generally black.

[wadesmith]

32 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Physiology.  The same way that the top sprinters are generally black.

So shouldn’t there be more black british speed skaters or cyclists? Wouldn’t that share a similar Phsiology to sprinting?

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, wadesmith said:

So shouldn’t there be more black british speed skaters or cyclists? Wouldn’t that share a similar Phsiology to sprinting?

No.

Cycling, certainly is about power to weight ratios, the physiology that makes a world class sprinter is completely wrong for a cyclist - maybe some similarities with some of the very short distance track sprinters, but even those guys weigh comparatively little.

Some of the long distance runners from Kenya, Eritrea, Ethiopia etc would probably make very good cyclists as they are basically skeletons with enormous lungs, however, they don't have the opportunity to ride like the Europeans and South Americans, so don't develop the skills needed to reach the top.  It's a lot easier to get hold of some trainers and go running than it is to get hold of a decent road bike and go riding on decent road surfaces.

[benjii]

20 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

No.

Cycling, certainly is about power to weight ratios, the physiology that makes a world class sprinter is completely wrong for a cyclist - maybe some similarities with some of the very short distance track sprinters, but even those guys weigh comparatively little.

Some of the long distance runners from Kenya, Eritrea, Ethiopia etc would probably make very good cyclists as they are basically skeletons with enormous lungs, however, they don't have the opportunity to ride like the Europeans and South Americans, so don't develop the skills needed to reach the top.  It's a lot easier to get hold of some trainers and go running than it is to get hold of a decent road bike and go riding on decent road surfaces.

Are you Richard Madeley?

Either way, I vote for you to commentate on the Olympics. 

[badgerx16]

22 hours ago, wadesmith said:

So shouldn’t there be more black british speed skaters or cyclists? Wouldn’t that share a similar Phsiology to sprinting?

Wilf O'Reilly won gold medals at the winter Olympics.

[sadoldgit]

20 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

No.

Cycling, certainly is about power to weight ratios, the physiology that makes a world class sprinter is completely wrong for a cyclist - maybe some similarities with some of the very short distance track sprinters, but even those guys weigh comparatively little.

Some of the long distance runners from Kenya, Eritrea, Ethiopia etc would probably make very good cyclists as they are basically skeletons with enormous lungs, however, they don't have the opportunity to ride like the Europeans and South Americans, so don't develop the skills needed to reach the top.  It's a lot easier to get hold of some trainers and go running than it is to get hold of a decent road bike and go riding on decent road surfaces.

So no skinny white Europeans with big lungs?

[badgerx16]

6 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

So no skinny white Europeans with big lungs?

Did you read what he wrote before making your insinuation ? He said that the issue was not physiological but lack of opportunity. There are some african professional cyclists riding for UCI teams, such as the Eritreans Daniel Teklehaimanot, Merhawi Kudus, and Natnael Berhane.

Edited 13 July, 2020 by badgerx16

[sadoldgit]

27 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Did you read what he wrote before making your insinuation ? He said that the issue was not physiological but lack of opportunity. There are some african professional cyclists riding for UCI teams, such as the Eritreans Daniel Teklehaimanot, Merhawi Kudus, and Natnael Berhane.

Yes I did thanks. I wasn’t referring to cyclists but long distance runners. Not sure why we are continuing to feel the need to put human beings into pigeon holes depending on race, religion or gender. Different people are good at different things depending on so many different factors.

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Yes I did thanks. I wasn’t referring to cyclists but long distance runners. Not sure why we are continuing to feel the need to put human beings into pigeon holes depending on race, religion or gender. Different people are good at different things depending on so many different factors.

So are there biological differences between men and women? 

[Weston Super Saint]

10 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Yes I did thanks. I wasn’t referring to cyclists but long distance runners. Not sure why we are continuing to feel the need to put human beings into pigeon holes depending on race, religion or gender. Different people are good at different things depending on so many different factors.

If you read the post again, I stated that sprinters tended to be black because of their physiology.  I've not mentioned anything about long distance runners - except when I've stated that there are plenty of black / African runners who could, if they had  the opportunity, become very good cyclists as a result of their physiology.  I have never claimed that there are no good white long distance runners as that is clearly ridiculous.

I agree with you that different people are good at different things.  I also agree that we shouldn't pidgeon hole people depending on their race.  I was merely pointing out that different physiologies make different people good at different things.  Their race, gender, colour, creed and religion are secondary to that, however, do have an influence on the opportunity available to become good at the different things.  I don't think it's 'racist' to point this out.

Edited 13 July, 2020 by Weston Super Saint

[badgerx16]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

So are there biological differences between men and women? 

Yes, women never stop talking, whilst men never seem to hear them.

[whelk]

43 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

So are there biological differences between men and women? 

I don’t see gender I just see a person. I want to call out all the hateful prejudicial shrieks when I choose to use the ladies for a piss. Crush these phobias and make sure we find some more quickly.