Equality in sport

[Zico]

43 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

It seems it means different things to different people then, for you it’s about Neanderthal racist abuse, no issue with that 

For many others, including the guy writing the piece in the Guardian it’s much more, it’s about racism in the fabric of our society that means the dice are loaded in the favour of white people and are against Black People. For those that think this is the case, I’m calling bullshit

Thats why I would prefer to see the kick it out campaign ahead of a BLM / Taking the knee in British football. It’s a much clearer message 

I think that's probably the subjective bit

you're unlikely to have experienced it

I've not either

I don't think it's as bad as the anarchists who've hijacked BLM make it out to be (or more to the point, their reaction is way OTT)

but have posted a link previously in the thread where 80+ governing bodies admitted they haven't tackled it from grass roots to boardroom level

whether that's not picking black kids for the hockey team or preferring to appoint whites into top level authority positions I don't know - but they admitted it, and say they will address it, they didn't have to admit, so I'll take their word for it- mainly because history tells us it's often been the case - in some countries it's exterme and obvious, in others less so - but unless you can prove it's bullshit, Id say let them deal with it if they choose to

I don't go for unconcious bias and all that, as I reckon we're all (as in everyone of every race and colour) are probably guilty of that

I agree it could be clearer, but the whole BLM thing has come about when the world is fucked and frustrated whist taking the knee has been going on for a while, so hopefully we'll get more clairty in due course and the anarchists will find something else to kick off about

[birch-chorley]

25 minutes ago, Mantra said:

From that article, I think this is the crux of our disagreement perhaps:

"Indeed, one of the great achievements of the Black Lives Matter movement has been to expose how racism operates in its totality: how an economy built on white exploitation and a self-image built on white supremacy generates white boardrooms and white administrations, how racism sustains itself through the nudge and the wink as much as the assault and the insult."

I'm guessing you disagree with that statement, whereas I think it's something worth considering.

I get what you're saying I just think you're looking at it a bit too cynically. Is a black person going to be rejected healthcare, education, welfare and justice just because they're black? Most likely not.

But does the status quo of society mean that there's more challenges/issues in these institutions for black people than white? I think so.

http://www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/The School Report.pdf

This is an interesting report, not that I think you should read it all but it does raise some good points. 

eg.

...in many areas funding has been cut or withdrawn entirely; and all dedicated programmes to support the recruitment and retention of Black and minority ethnic (BME) teachers have been cancelled (Gillborn, 2014) condemned as a racist. For example, Philip Davies (a Conservative MP) used a Select Committee appearance to attack the Director General of the BBC, Tony Hall, when it was proposed to increase the representation of BME staff:

‘I personally consider it to be a racist approach’, Davies said, confronting Hall in a Commons culture, media and sport select committee session on the future of the BBC on Tuesday. ‘I think that the true racist sees everything in terms of race, or colour. Surely what we should be aiming to be is colour blind.’ (The Guardian, 2014) And there we have it, from a member of the ruling political party: ‘the true racist’ is defined by reference to someone trying to improve the representation of minority ethnic people in their workplace. This is the monsterisation of race equality: White people are portrayed as race victims; anti-racism is recast as racism; and the conditions are created for further and more extreme race inequity under the banner of ‘colour-blindness’.

 

 

 

I’ve worked for 2 major global multinationals in my time and I’ve never known anyone to consider race when looking to recruit. It’s hard enough to find the best person for the job without limiting what you can take on. Do you believe any company worth it’s salt wouldn’t take on a Black person because of the colour of their skin? It’s few and far between if it’s an issue at all 

I currently work for an Indian company, the whole board is Indian, our commercial office in London is probably 50% BAME. Our factory and production up in the NE has barely any BAME but then again that’s representative of the demographic up there. 

The bit about white boardrooms, again I don’t believe this is a great issue. Partly for the same reason as above, lots of these companies have large offices outside of London, the BAME % is much lower than London so it needs to be looked at regionally rather than nationally 

Even nationally I think FTSE 100 companies have 7% BAME directors in the boardroom. The average age of a board member in the FTSE 100 is 58.5 years old, so they finished Uni and started working in the late 70’s / early 80’s (on average). At that time the % of BAME in this country was below 5%, so actually is the current 7% really an issue? Especially when you consider that BAME massively over index in NHS / healthcare, whilst good careers they don’t really lead to FTSE 100 boardrooms do they?

The % of people who would identify as BAME has exploded in recent decades, half of them were born overseas (1991 census 5%, 2001 10% and 2011 15%). The average age of a BAME person is a full 10 years younger than a white person (31 vs 41). The fact that 80% of all black people in this country live in a few dozen square miles of London isn’t helping achieve national parity either. It’s going to take decades to get to a point where you can start looking for some sort of parity in statistics. It’s just too fresh and too small a data set at the moment 

Edited September 16, 2020 by birch-chorley

[Tonge moor green jacket]

14 hours ago, Youri McAnespie said:

I'm not stupid, I know that was a filum, however life imitates art, Norton (pictured below) has real ones in his real life...they get covered with make-up for his now infrequent roles, being blackballed for his beliefs.

However now Harvey Weinstein is banged up and his brother's name is mud expect to see Herr Norton (pictured below) back on screen on a regular basis from now on...

Are you serious about this? Still not sure.

I had a look last night, as I didn't know anything about him. From what I could find, his tats were for films.

The other stuff is bollocks, urban myths and fake pictures etc.

 

[tomski]

37 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

I’ve worked for 2 major global multinationals in my time and I’ve never known anyone to consider race when looking to recruit. It’s hard enough to find the best person for the job without limiting what you can take on. Do you believe any company worth it’s salt wouldn’t take on a Black person because of the colour of their skin? It’s few and far between if it’s an issue at all 

I currently work for an Indian company, the whole board is Indian, our commercial office in London is probably 50% BAME. Our factory and production up in the NE has barely any BAME but then again that’s representative of the demographic up there. 

The bit about white boardrooms, again I don’t believe this is a great issue. Partly for the same reason as above, lots of these companies have large offices outside of London, the BAME % is much lower than London so it needs to be looked at regionally rather than nationally 

Even nationally I think FTSE 100 companies have 7% BAME directors in the boardroom. The average age of a board member in the FTSE 100 is 58.5 years old, so they finished Uni and started working in the late 70’s / early 80’s (on average). At that time the % of BAME in this country was below 5%, so actually is the current 7% really an issue? Especially when you consider that BAME massively over index in NHS / healthcare, whilst good careers they don’t really lead to FTSE 100 boardrooms do they?

The % of people who would identify as BAME has exploded in recent decades, half of them were born overseas (1991 census 5%, 2001 10% and 2011 15%). The average age of a BAME person is a full 10 years younger than a white person (31 vs 41). The fact that 80% of all black people in this country live in a few dozen square miles of London isn’t helping achieve national parity either. It’s going to take decades to get to a point where you can start looking for some sort of parity in statistics. It’s just too fresh and too small a data set at the moment 

You going for a promotion to the boardroom mate? Hehe

[Mantra]

26 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

I’ve worked for 2 major global multinationals in my time and I’ve never known anyone to consider race when looking to recruit. It’s hard enough to find the best person for the job without limiting what you can take on. Do you believe any company worth it’s salt wouldn’t take on a Black person because of the colour of their skin? It’s few and far between if it’s an issue at all 

I currently work for an Indian company, the whole board is Indian, our commercial office in London is probably 50% BAME. Our factory and production up in the NE has barely any BAME but then again that’s representative of the demographic up there. 

The bit about white boardrooms, again I don’t believe this is a great issue. Partly for the same reason as above, lots of these companies have large offices outside of London, the BAME % is much lower than London so it needs to be looked at regionally rather than nationally 

Even nationally I think FTSE 100 companies have 7% BAME directors in the boardroom. The average age of a board member in the FTSE 100 is 58.5 years old, so they finished Uni and started working in the late 70’s / early 80’s (on average). At that time the % of BAME in this country was below 5%, so actually is the current 7% really an issue? Especially when you consider that BAME massively over index in NHS / healthcare, whilst good careers they don’t really lead to FTSE 100 boardrooms do they?

The % of people who would identify as BAME has exploded in recent decades, half of them were born overseas (1991 census 5%, 2001 10% and 2011 15%). The average age of a BAME person is a full 10 years younger than a white person (31 vs 41). The fact that 80% of all black people in this country live in a few dozen square miles of London isn’t helping achieve national parity either. It’s going to take decades to get to a point where you can start looking for some sort of parity in statistics. It’s just too fresh and too small a data set at the moment 

No I don't believe "any company worth it's salt...", I've alluded to that where I don't think it's as literal as that, this movement is more about recognising the less visible elements of racism. Perhaps in football the issues are more explicit but in general life (as that's what this debate keeps coming back to,) I think it's important to consider.

Totally agree that it will take a long time and people expect too much too soon. I also think you raise good points about age and % of BAME in London etc. But is it not a systemic issue that BAME people are overrepresented in healthcare and underrepresented in boardrooms?

I agree that it's not a problem that can be fixed right away or with positive discrimination but I think it's important to realise why it is the case and what the issues are surrounding that. In the past, women lacked options for careers, they were either teachers, nurses or nuns. Now women have much more freedom of choice and these movements are about enabling people to have more choice and to not be discriminated against in any conscious or subconscious way.

Anyway, aside from all that - I mainly disagree with you on your stance that the BLM/taking a knee before football fixtures is a negative thing or isn't important.

I'll leave it at that so feel free to have the last word.

[birch-chorley]

52 minutes ago, Mantra said:

No I don't believe "any company worth it's salt...", I've alluded to that where I don't think it's as literal as that, this movement is more about recognising the less visible elements of racism. Perhaps in football the issues are more explicit but in general life (as that's what this debate keeps coming back to,) I think it's important to consider.

Totally agree that it will take a long time and people expect too much too soon. I also think you raise good points about age and % of BAME in London etc. But is it not a systemic issue that BAME people are overrepresented in healthcare and underrepresented in boardrooms?

I agree that it's not a problem that can be fixed right away or with positive discrimination but I think it's important to realise why it is the case and what the issues are surrounding that. In the past, women lacked options for careers, they were either teachers, nurses or nuns. Now women have much more freedom of choice and these movements are about enabling people to have more choice and to not be discriminated against in any conscious or subconscious way.

Anyway, aside from all that - I mainly disagree with you on your stance that the BLM/taking a knee before football fixtures is a negative thing or isn't important.

I'll leave it at that so feel free to have the last word.

I don’t think it’s a systemic issue, which sort of means it’s a negative thing 

BAME over represent in healthcare because culturally they strive for it, its a highly respected role in that community, less so for the white British population. I don’t know why that needs to be an issue at all, cultural differences are generally a good thing and make for a better society on the whole, striving for parity seems counter productive 

Ive given my reasons why I think 7% of boardrooms being BAME is about right, I’m not sure why anyone would really think it should be aligned to the population of 14% given all the points I’ve made previously 

Looking at the data in all key areas of the system It’s clear that Chinese & Indian British wipe the floor with white British from early school results right through to average earnings and life expectancy. If the system was rigged in favour of white skin colour then surely that wouldn’t be the case. I appreciate the Black community performs poorly (especially Caribbean heritage, African tend to outperform) but how much of that is their own responsibility and not down to the system?

Thinking the impact of their culture on their ability to achieve, particularly the number of absent father's not around to provide for their families both financially and emotionally 

For all the protesting and talk of injustice, I didn’t see many in those communities holding their hands up and admitting they can do better as a community. If the Chinese and Indian groups can, surely they can 

[royal white]

2 hours ago, birch-chorley said:

I’ve worked for 2 major global multinationals in my time and I’ve never known anyone to consider race when looking to recruit. It’s hard enough to find the best person for the job without limiting what you can take on. Do you believe any company worth it’s salt wouldn’t take on a Black person because of the colour of their skin? It’s few and far between if it’s an issue at all 

I currently work for an Indian company, the whole board is Indian, our commercial office in London is probably 50% BAME. Our factory and production up in the NE has barely any BAME but then again that’s representative of the demographic up there. 

The bit about white boardrooms, again I don’t believe this is a great issue. Partly for the same reason as above, lots of these companies have large offices outside of London, the BAME % is much lower than London so it needs to be looked at regionally rather than nationally 

Even nationally I think FTSE 100 companies have 7% BAME directors in the boardroom. The average age of a board member in the FTSE 100 is 58.5 years old, so they finished Uni and started working in the late 70’s / early 80’s (on average). At that time the % of BAME in this country was below 5%, so actually is the current 7% really an issue? Especially when you consider that BAME massively over index in NHS / healthcare, whilst good careers they don’t really lead to FTSE 100 boardrooms do they?

The % of people who would identify as BAME has exploded in recent decades, half of them were born overseas (1991 census 5%, 2001 10% and 2011 15%). The average age of a BAME person is a full 10 years younger than a white person (31 vs 41). The fact that 80% of all black people in this country live in a few dozen square miles of London isn’t helping achieve national parity either. It’s going to take decades to get to a point where you can start looking for some sort of parity in statistics. It’s just too fresh and too small a data set at the moment 

👏🏻👏🏻

[Tonge moor green jacket]

Birch- fancy standing for Parliament?

Couple of excellent posts there.

[Zico]

4 hours ago, birch-chorley said:

I don’t think it’s a systemic issue, which sort of means it’s a negative thing 

BAME over represent in healthcare because culturally they strive for it, its a highly respected role in that community, less so for the white British population. I don’t know why that needs to be an issue at all, cultural differences are generally a good thing and make for a better society on the whole, striving for parity seems counter productive 

Ive given my reasons why I think 7% of boardrooms being BAME is about right, I’m not sure why anyone would really think it should be aligned to the population of 14% given all the points I’ve made previously 

Looking at the data in all key areas of the system It’s clear that Chinese & Indian British wipe the floor with white British from early school results right through to average earnings and life expectancy. If the system was rigged in favour of white skin colour then surely that wouldn’t be the case. I appreciate the Black community performs poorly (especially Caribbean heritage, African tend to outperform) but how much of that is their own responsibility and not down to the system?

Thinking the impact of their culture on their ability to achieve, particularly the number of absent father's not around to provide for their families both financially and emotionally 

For all the protesting and talk of injustice, I didn’t see many in those communities holding their hands up and admitting they can do better as a community. If the Chinese and Indian groups can, surely they can 

these are the conversations that need to happen, not sure how they'd take place, but they do

the posts you've made with the stats stack up in terms of representation in big business, the question then is, is that what BLM or bending the knee is about, or what?

it would be interesting to see someone who genuinely faces issues, or has vast experience of the issues (dunno, a public servant or something) have an open discussion and debate points such as the one you make

that why they and we (for want of a better way of phrasing it) can see where folk are coming from

just beacuse black footballers are multi millionaires doesn't mean they and there family have faced issues - so let's hear what they are and why they bend the knee

fuck that bird from oxford who wants to form a militia and shut down the police and prisons, that ain't constructive and I  suspect only anarchists/exteremists support them 

folk like raheem sterling have spoken out, others have highlighted the issues they face

what needs to happen now is for it to progress to the next stage and openly talk about what we can do about it

is BLM a united global stance against racism or a national one?

I'm anti racism, they say it's not enough, and I'm against positive discrimination

personally I think there are problems, but until there's an open discussion about it and steps are seen to be made, they're going to keep on bending the knee

so they can for me, just stop with the extreme stuff

[royal white]

1 hour ago, ZicoKelly said:

these are the conversations that need to happen, not sure how they'd take place, but they do

the posts you've made with the stats stack up in terms of representation in big business, the question then is, is that what BLM or bending the knee is about, or what?

it would be interesting to see someone who genuinely faces issues, or has vast experience of the issues (dunno, a public servant or something) have an open discussion and debate points such as the one you make

that why they and we (for want of a better way of phrasing it) can see where folk are coming from

just beacuse black footballers are multi millionaires doesn't mean they and there family have faced issues - so let's hear what they are and why they bend the knee

fuck that bird from oxford who wants to form a militia and shut down the police and prisons, that ain't constructive and I  suspect only anarchists/exteremists support them 

folk like raheem sterling have spoken out, others have highlighted the issues they face

what needs to happen now is for it to progress to the next stage and openly talk about what we can do about it

is BLM a united global stance against racism or a national one?

I'm anti racism, they say it's not enough, and I'm against positive discrimination

personally I think there are problems, but until there's an open discussion about it and steps are seen to be made, they're going to keep on bending the knee

so they can for me, just stop with the extreme stuff

Surely it’s best to all be kept under the racism umbrella? Racism effects all colours, nationalities, religions. 
 

Stick to the kick it out campaign 

[Zico]

28 minutes ago, royal white said:

Surely it’s best to all be kept under the racism umbrella? Racism effects all colours, nationalities, religions. 
 

Stick to the kick it out campaign 

Yeah i don't think thats working

But aye

Whilst we're dealing with the blacks work on the Muslims too as they get their fair share because of the nut jobs

[ErnestTurnip]

6 hours ago, birch-chorley said:

I appreciate the Black community performs poorly (especially Caribbean heritage, African tend to outperform) but how much of that is their own responsibility and not down to the system?

Black people perform badly because they are black ?

 

[Zico]

15 minutes ago, ErnestTurnip said:

Black people perform badly because they are black ?

 

"Because they are lazy"

Ron Atkinson, 2004

[birch-chorley]

2 hours ago, ZicoKelly said:

these are the conversations that need to happen, not sure how they'd take place, but they do

the posts you've made with the stats stack up in terms of representation in big business, the question then is, is that what BLM or bending the knee is about, or what?

it would be interesting to see someone who genuinely faces issues, or has vast experience of the issues (dunno, a public servant or something) have an open discussion and debate points such as the one you make

that why they and we (for want of a better way of phrasing it) can see where folk are coming from

just beacuse black footballers are multi millionaires doesn't mean they and there family have faced issues - so let's hear what they are and why they bend the knee

fuck that bird from oxford who wants to form a militia and shut down the police and prisons, that ain't constructive and I  suspect only anarchists/exteremists support them 

folk like raheem sterling have spoken out, others have highlighted the issues they face

what needs to happen now is for it to progress to the next stage and openly talk about what we can do about it

is BLM a united global stance against racism or a national one?

I'm anti racism, they say it's not enough, and I'm against positive discrimination

personally I think there are problems, but until there's an open discussion about it and steps are seen to be made, they're going to keep on bending the knee

so they can for me, just stop with the extreme stuff

Following all of the BLM riots / protests the Government have commissioned a review into race and ethnic disparities headed by Tony Sewell (a prominent black community leader). He wrote an article for the Spectator that I shared previously....

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/rod-liddle-is-right-about-black-boys-and-absent-dads

Don’t think the left will be happy with him running the review....

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/16/concern-choice-charity-boss-tony-sewell-head-uk-race-commission

I think the abscent father stuff will play a big part in the review, even we’ll know lefty David Lammy has linked it to knife crime before now.... 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19815831

 

 

[birch-chorley]

23 minutes ago, ErnestTurnip said:

Black people perform badly because they are black ?

 

Black African do better at school than white British, Black Caribbean do worse than both 

If colour of skin is playing a part then you’d expect Black Africans to perform behind worse than white British as well surely 

Means Educational attainment has nothing to do with skin colour for my money. Something cultural must be driving it, perhaps a greater number of absent fathers in the Caribbean group  

 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

51 minutes ago, ErnestTurnip said:

Black people perform badly because they are black ?

 

No, and that isn't his point.

They perform badly because of a bad attitude, laziness or whatever. Maybe as birch says because of cultural/social issues.

Christ, there are huge numbers of poorly performing white kids from more underprivileged areas. Is that because they are white or because of cultural/social issues too?

[Zico]

41 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Following all of the BLM riots / protests the Government have commissioned a review into race and ethnic disparities headed by Tony Sewell (a prominent black community leader). He wrote an article for the Spectator that I shared previously....

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/rod-liddle-is-right-about-black-boys-and-absent-dads

Don’t think the left will be happy with him running the review....

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/16/concern-choice-charity-boss-tony-sewell-head-uk-race-commission

I think the abscent father stuff will play a big part in the review, even we’ll know lefty David Lammy has linked it to knife crime before now.... 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19815831

 

 

So is it dad's fault for being absent or mum's fault for being intolerable?

[Tonge moor green jacket]

Put a nodder on it.

[Mantra]

5 hours ago, ZicoKelly said:

these are the conversations that need to happen, not sure how they'd take place, but they do

the posts you've made with the stats stack up in terms of representation in big business, the question then is, is that what BLM or bending the knee is about, or what?

it would be interesting to see someone who genuinely faces issues, or has vast experience of the issues (dunno, a public servant or something) have an open discussion and debate points such as the one you make

that why they and we (for want of a better way of phrasing it) can see where folk are coming from

just beacuse black footballers are multi millionaires doesn't mean they and there family have faced issues - so let's hear what they are and why they bend the knee

fuck that bird from oxford who wants to form a militia and shut down the police and prisons, that ain't constructive and I  suspect only anarchists/exteremists support them 

folk like raheem sterling have spoken out, others have highlighted the issues they face

what needs to happen now is for it to progress to the next stage and openly talk about what we can do about it

is BLM a united global stance against racism or a national one?

I'm anti racism, they say it's not enough, and I'm against positive discrimination

personally I think there are problems, but until there's an open discussion about it and steps are seen to be made, they're going to keep on bending the knee

so they can for me, just stop with the extreme stuff

It was a good debate with Birch, he had good points that were well backed up and we kept it civil which is something that I don't see a lot of in these sorts of debates.

I still disagree with him about the pre-match protests being too over the top/frequent (not to twist his words but that was the gist), because at least the leagues and players are standing up (or kneeling down) for a good cause and not just ignoring the issue. Whether you want to give/take the message as systemic racism or just racism is bad is up to each individual. It gets conversations going at least and helps us understand these issues better.

From my point of view I think it's important to show understanding and compassion for issues like this and I think there's more to it that meets the eye than just boardroom representation.

The debate about whether the black community shoulders the responsibility vs the system failing them is a complex debate and not one I'm qualified to fully tackle but in my opinion there must be something in there that comes from historical/systemic (whatever you want to call it) racism/inequality. It's not just that black fathers are more absent because they have darker pigmentation, same with coronavirus affecting blacks more. It's to do with the culture or situation of that race, which has been deeply affected by history.

[Escobarp]

9 hours ago, ZicoKelly said:

So is it dad's fault for being absent or mum's fault for being intolerable?

Coz dads a player innit. Doin bits and chasing tings cuz

[birch-chorley]

8 hours ago, Mantra said:

It was a good debate with Birch, he had good points that were well backed up and we kept it civil which is something that I don't see a lot of in these sorts of debates.

I still disagree with him about the pre-match protests being too over the top/frequent (not to twist his words but that was the gist), because at least the leagues and players are standing up (or kneeling down) for a good cause and not just ignoring the issue. Whether you want to give/take the message as systemic racism or just racism is bad is up to each individual. It gets conversations going at least and helps us understand these issues better.

From my point of view I think it's important to show understanding and compassion for issues like this and I think there's more to it that meets the eye than just boardroom representation.

The debate about whether the black community shoulders the responsibility vs the system failing them is a complex debate and not one I'm qualified to fully tackle but in my opinion there must be something in there that comes from historical/systemic (whatever you want to call it) racism/inequality. It's not just that black fathers are more absent because they have darker pigmentation, same with coronavirus affecting blacks more. It's to do with the culture or situation of that race, which has been deeply affected by history.

I think it’s very clear that the absent father rates in the Black community are having a huge impact on that communities statistics. These poor kids are more likely to flunk out of school, turn to crime, pick up a knife, get stopped and searched, go to jail, before walking out on a child themselves. 

I certainly don’t think it’s genetic, it has to be nurture over nature. I bet if you switched a white kid from say Lincoln with a young fatherless black kid from London then the you’d see the cultural impact win out over anything genetic 

So is the culture of absent fathers in the U.K. black community the fault of the system? Again if you look at British Chinese and British Indian communities who have faced the exact same structural racism issues in the U.K. through the 60’s, 70’s etc - Absent fathers are only 1% which helps them achieve well at school and avoid the trappings of crime. Previous evidence indicates that absent father levels are greater in the Black Caribbean community (60%) which could be why they perform worse than the Black African community in a lot of the data (Black African perform better than white British in Education attainment)....

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/mar/23/proud-young-black-fathers

Furthermore if you look at both the US and Caribbean (again 60% absent) then it’s an issue there as well which shows it’s not UK specific. An interesting quote from Obama in 2008...

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/16/us/politics/15cnd-obama.html

I guess you could say that this cultural phenomenon is a result of slavery and oppression, but for me that’s too easy an excuse. Most groups that went to the new world hundreds of years ago did so under a cloud. The largest group to migrate to America were the German Lutherans who now make up most of the mid west, faced horrendous persecution back home based on their religion so fled to the new world. Likewise the Irish were starved out of their country by rich land owners from the U.K. In the West a flood of Chinese migrants came in to escape famine back home and still faced persecution in the US. Yet it’s only the Black American group who have such a distinctive absent father % 

If you try to rule slavery out and look at Africa then I believe it’s an issue over there as well...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3710932/
 

Anyway, you’d think the BLM movement would try to tackle this issue, instead their official stance is to ‘end the western prescribed nuclear family’. Which tells me they think that society should flex to accommodate this anomaly rather than they themselves doing the right thing and promote Dads bringing up their kids the right way. It’s another reason why I think BLM has no place on a football shirt. I guess you can say well that’s not what it’s about but if it’s the official stance then it’s very hard to decouple it for me. 

 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2020 by birch-chorley

[Zico]

right

step one

make "baby daddys" illegal

[DazBob]

Are the baby daddies absent because they're all in prison?

[deane koontz]

Fucking hell 😂

[Rudy]

2 hours ago, DazBob said:

Are the baby daddies absent because they're all in prison?

Dead, killed by police, do keep up.