~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Mr_Crick84
[–]Nybaz 872 points873 points874 points 6 years ago (76 children) | Copy Link
The definition of racism and sexism, all in one title
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 329 points330 points331 points 6 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
Exactly,Everyone can see it but nobody cares - This shit must have been checked by a ton of people before it was posted
[–]coolysean 108 points109 points110 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
It is because to them you have to be in power to be racist and sexist.
[–]lethrowaway4me 89 points90 points91 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Which makes zero sense. What does some subjective position of "power" have to do with prejudice?
[–]FlatTire2005 82 points83 points84 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
It doesn’t, but these are hateful, prejudicial people. They are hateful the way you’d imagine the average person from the 1800s to be, but with today’s “rules”, they’re allowed to be hateful while claiming virtue as long as it is against the “correct” targets. It involves doublethink, useful idiots, and hatred, and too many people are incapable of independent thought and have an unwillingness to stop hating. So then stuff like this happens.
[–]Azurenightsky 38 points39 points40 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
But remember boys and girls.
Always keep score. It helps you to determine if it is malicious or simply stupidity in action. If it was random chance or simple stupidity, you'd be winning a few rounds.
Are you winning lately?
[–]Mackowatosc 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Meh. Never say someone is stupid if you might attribute being malicious to them.
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's the second definition that's been in vogue with Social Justice for a long time: Prejudice = Power + Privilege.
To understand it, I suggest watching this Video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqqdmRUGoOA
Over forty minutes long, but the sheer amount of research is worth it in addition to how it'll open your eyes on the how's and why's.
To sum it up: It's an 'activist' definition, meant not to provoke educated discussion but impulsive course correction at any cost.
It makes all the sense if you think about who is saying stuff like that: women that covet exactly that position of power.
[–]Phrodo_00 20 points21 points22 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
And of course, being able to publish an article for millions to see is not power.
[–]northstraw 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, and they think it is a good thing. Actually you are more likely to get in trouble because of it. So if you accidentally offend let’s say a woman, they can say that you are a sexist and many people would back her up.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Fantastic! That means I can go to China and be as disgusting as I want! Thanks for the loophole, friendos!
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Watch out, you maybe be accused of rape for suggesting something.
[–]BlueLadybug92 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The fact that this was definitely ran through a few editors and probably dropped to the team that actually publishes it onto the website confirms the worse; This is exactly what they want.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Oh yeah, This is no accident - The BBC pushes this attitude daily on the news ect
[–]Maann1 23 points24 points25 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They are literally calling being a white male a flaw, doesn't get much more racist/sexist than that
[–]KaydenD10 30 points31 points32 points 6 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link
I don't understand why it's okay to be racist to white people but not others? What kind of world do we live in?
[+]nixxiepixie -46 points-45 points-44 points 6 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link
It’s never okay to be prejudiced or discriminatory towards anyone but I think the point most people try to make is white people can’t face racism, because simply put racism is the systemic oppression of people with the least proximity to whiteness. And the only time racism is ever not systemic, is when it is used as an umbrella term to include white people. Then it boils down to hurt feelings.
[–]Azurenightsky 19 points20 points21 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Right, now what makes one Systemic and the Other not?
How is one deemed to be more powerful than the other? Because one is alleged to come from the Government and the other The People?
[–]nixxiepixie 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Whew great question. Like let’s say a black woman wearing her hair naturally as it grew out her head was so widely considered ugly and ghetto (even though white women can wear their hair as it naturally grows out their heads no matter how embarrassing and thin that shyte looks) that an actual law had to be passed so institutions can stop discriminating against black women. The hate for black hair stems from white supremacy-which is a social thing. There’s no official or practical discrimination against curls. However because racism is inextricably systemic, that societal beauty standard started to harm black women in the work place, in schools, in the law. Now can you think of a beauty standard (you can’t because whiteness is the standard that’s the problem) against white women that is so pervasive that it affects how institutions interact and treat white women, or white people for that matter? So while not all discrimination stems from the government, some discrimination is so powerful that it can affect our governments and institutions. Saying white people cant dance will never be as detrimental as saying black men are violent. And that’s the difference between racism and hurt feelings.
[+]janearcade -20 points-19 points-18 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Basically. An individual person calling a white person a "cracker" is different than banks giving bad loans to black people.
[–]Icerith 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Different, but they are both completely racist. You're just arbitrarily deciding one is worse to fit an agenda. They're both morally abhorrent. I'll agree that one is hurt feelings and one is hurt livelihoods, but that doesn't necessarily make one worse than the other.
Plus, banks are not government owned. By that description, the government is often less racist towards minorities because the hardcore push for affirmative action in the past 15 years. If anything, white people and asian people are being discriminated against way more in the government sector, excluding courts.
I believe black and Hispanic people have been given a raw deal in this country. I don't necessarily believe it's because of racism, though. That might be a reason, but it's pretty clear that it can't be the only one because there are plenty of black people who are successful.
[–]Azurenightsky -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
less racist towards minorities because the hardcore push for affirmative action in the past 15 years.
Now hold up
They assume we need a leg up and so they rob us of any satisfaction in improving our lives, because they assume we need a leg up because otherwise how are we to compete with Whitey?
Government is More racist than any of you individually could ever be.
But racism is racism, that's my whole point :3
If anything, white people and asian people are being discriminated against way more in the government sector, excluding courts.
No, we're all being equally discriminated against by the Government, they sow division to keep us distracted from what they take from us. You surrender on average 1/3 of your income to Government in Taxes in some form or other, imagine not working 4 months out of the year, that's how much they take. Pay attention to the right enemy.
but it's pretty clear that it can't be the only one because there are plenty of black people who are successful.
But now you're partaking in a fallacious form of thinking. You went with a "group" then suggested that individuals break free from said group, therefor the initial reasoning is invalid. That's ridiculous, both can still be true. There is systemic bias and racism in place, it does hamper people, some of us just have more drive than others. It's more of an "imagine what we might achieve without the prejudice we're all carrying" kind of thing than the ability to say it's not because of racism. I don't want to suggest racial superiority in any fashion, I'm a mutt myself, I'm just saying that the way we look at this is deeply flawed.
The big picture is big and it incorporates a lot more Historical knowledge than the average person has. Like who actually owned the slaves, what their genetic background was, etc and so on, who made their wealth in America and How, who knew where the roads and Highways were going to be built and when, these are all timeless questions that most people have never pondered for even a second.
Can you imagine the power you can accrue if you know where the cities and highways and pulsing points of a birthing nation are going to be long before those roads are built? Can you imagine the leverage one gets with penny investments on that scale? So many people think they can see the big picture when all they see is a tiny corner of a much, much grander mosaic. They decry it as impossible and mock the notion, because in it's complexity it seems entirely and woefully beyond them and their imaginings.
But the Big Picture is real and truly disgusting, racism is one angle on it, but the Big Picture has always been to sow division internally. Intersectional Feminism is the Ultimate variation of that, you only know suffering if you're born under Throws some dice at a nearby braying goat Black, Trans, Poly gendered and with a slight gait, but only in your left foot. Right footed gait has privilege.
People get enamored with busy bodied nonsense, arguing with absolute nonsense words like "Bigot", which literally means "One who is intolerant of anothers opinion", which means ANTIFA are Bigots, but it's OK, because they hate the Nazis, not at all understanding the disgusting layers of mental gymnastics and Word Wizardry they're fucking around in. People have lost sight of reality and are living in a Nonsense world. Sooner we awaken from it the better. Racism is one aspect of it, but only in so far as it allows for division, they don't want us looking at what they are truly up too.
[–]janearcade -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I don't agree they are the same and have the same impacts, but thanks for sharing your position.
[–]Icerith 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't agree either. I never stated that.
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"It’s never okay to be prejudiced or discriminatory towards anyone"
This is where you should have ended your comment.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link
It’s never okay to be prejudiced or discriminatory towards anyone but I think the point most people try to make is white people can’t face racism
And what do you call this article except another corporate approved form of thinly viled racism from the BBC?
because simply put racism is the systemic oppression of people with the least proximity to whiteness.
A theory that came from an elementary form of education and pushed as something equal to the standards of University Education. Did you know that not all sociologists are unified as a whole on the "power differential" approach? Because a lot of it was meant to galvanize people to action without application of critical thought and nuance. The template for today's Social Justice Warrior.
Is it any wonder no one is taking Higher Education and Intellectualism seriously anymore? Not all of it stems from ignorance and a declining IQ. In fact, I'd dare say it takes someone with great IQ to discern constructive critique meant to invoke productive debate versus the condescending, insulting drivel gratefully being accepted by our bastions of education to this day!
[–]nixxiepixie -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Yeah okay Imma totally NOT listen to the guy that said fvck education and higher education at that. But look at the evidence; every form of racism is systemic until racism is applied as an umbrella term to encompass white people. Then and only then is racism simplified to egoism or hurt feelings. Every other instance is systemic. Have a thought process for a sec bby luv
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Yeah okay Imma totally NOT listen to the guy that said fvck education and higher education at that.
I never said anything of the sort. You're being disingenuous so stop. Oh yeah, you're the one to preach education with those spelling errors and poor grammer structure, self-proclaimed high and mighty "intellectual!".
every form of racism is systemic
No it isn't and that's activist thinking, not educated thinking, ignoramus. Not everyone in the sociological field is in agreement as I pointed out. Have some critical thought. You're sorely lacking it.
Have a thought process for a sec bby luv
There it is everyone: your new generation of highly educated individual.
I weep for the future.
[–]nixxiepixie 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
It’s quite classist, ableist, and racist to base ones intellectual capacity around their English proficiency. Academia, as a rule, is inaccessible especially to those who are of lower classes, disabled, or of non-European origin. Anyway, there doesn’t have to be unanimous consensus within sociology that every form of racism is systemic. Not every scientist is in agreement against conversion therapy. But you should trust the definition coined by those who are well familiar with racism, systemic institutions, and how these intersect. Lastly, I’ll like to advise you to try some recreational drugs, because you have a weird aversion to colloquialism and seriously need to chill your shiit g. Don’t try that elitist shit on someone who’s intelligence so blatantly threatens your own that you feel the need to go out of your way to shame them for being casual even though they explained their point eloquently. Not everyone has the same access to education or English that you and I have. That’s a privilege. A good way to not be a bigot is to not shame people for not sharing your privilege. Hope you open your mind before your mouth but I don’t have much faith in people who’s minds are so fixed and narrow.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Ever heard of a mirror? It's a handy tool when you're accusing someone of elitism while vomiting word salad in order to appear so high and knowledgeable when you're as ignorant as the bigoted masses you invent everyday in your head so as to add purpose to your meager, meaningless existence.
Lastly, I’ll like to advise you to try some recreational drugs, because you have a weird aversion to colloquialism and seriously need to chill your shiit g.
No, I just have an aversion to intellectual snobs believing they can walk on water. Like here:
Lastly, I’ll like to advise you to try some recreational drugs, because you have a weird aversion to colloquialism and seriously need to chill your shiit g. Don’t try that elitist shit on someone who’s intelligence so blatantly threatens your own that you feel the need to go out of your way to shame them for being casual even though they explained their point eloquently.
Part of that would get your teeth knocked out in real life. Not everyone is prone to excusing insults because they're all dolled up in fancy language.
And you didn't explain anything except parrot the kind of exclusionary claptrap you new generation of academics and intellectuals rely on to keep the masses in constant conflict with each other. Tolerant my ass.
Not everyone has the same access to education or English that you and I have. That’s a privilege.
There's a difference between you and I: I don't use that education as an excuse for bigotry and judgement on a group. And you want to talk about privelege? You have the fucking luxary of living consequence free for the above because we're in a climate that has made your form non-taboo. Yet here I come, a white man, flagging it down and out leaps the little toddler who was never told "No!" in their life and punished accordingly.
A good way to not be a bigot is to not shame people for not sharing your privilege. Hope you open your mind before your mouth but I don’t have much faith in people who’s minds are so fixed and narrow.
Bah ha ha ha! Oh my, you're a laugh riot. So predictable.
Thanks for making my day and providing me with another stirring example of the kind of education rampant in today's higher institutions.
And people wonder why the majority of men don't attend college/university.
[–]nixxiepixie 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Who gon knock out MY teeth? A West Indian woman with more dick and balls than you and any American I’ve ever encountered? You think I’m elitist, I’m not. I’m confident and I can back everything I say up. And that threatens the shit out of you, you’re on defensive. Reread your own words. And I’ve yet to dole out an insult. Sorry if you were insulted, but maybe ask yourself why you feel insulted when I shine light to difficult topics. Does it threaten your privilege? Threaten what you’ve been thought? Think about it. Also I don’t use my education lmao as an excuse for bigotry. Where have I been bigoted? Sorry white people can’t face racism? If you think that’s bigotry, you couldn’t last an hour as me bro lmfao. And you think I, a black woman, has never been told ‘no’, white man? Alright, okay. Never been punished justly AND unjustly? Alright, okay.
And majority of men don’t attend higher education because they don’t need it. The system was made for men, especially white men. White men can get a job a lot easier than the rest of us can, and that’s why we need degrees. And honestly, screw that system too. Education system sucks, especially for men, but weird how women dominate the education system but then in the workforce they’re more men named John in leadership positions than women in the entire world. Like alright, okay.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
My you are the personification of the bitter, sassy black female stereotype. I'm surprised you didn't sprinkle in a "Boy!" here and there. Congratulations.
And majority of men don’t attend higher education because they don’t need it. The system was made for men, especially white men.
Yup, keep making assertions without backing them up except boasting about your ability to back them up.
I could provide a nice, clean counterpoint but judging by your attitude, it's entirely wasted.
White men can get a job a lot easier than the rest of us can, and that’s why we need degrees.
In spite of statistics illustrating the education gap for men?
Yup, entirely wasted on someone as prejudiced as you.
Education system sucks, especially for men, but weird how women dominate the education system but then in the workforce they’re more men named John in leadership positions than women in the entire world.
Maybe because they work hard for it. You know, WORK. W-o-r-k.
It's not always racism and sexism.
Like alright, okay.
Yeah, you go grrl...straight to the exit and don't let the door hit your egotistical ass on the way out.
[–]PlatinumBeetle 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
If I said "Fuck you nigger" would that be racism? Because it is not even remotely as systematic as lots of things white people face, and there is no power differential in my favor since I'm just some random internet NEET. It would just be hurting someone's feelings and therefore not racism by your definition. But you wouldn't agree it's not racism because regardless of how you pretend to define it you decide what's racism based on which race is effected.
Because you are racist. You're just a giant hypocrite.
[–]nixxiepixie -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
But the word nigger is a racial slur that reinforces the disparity in equality between black people and others. It’s a contemptuous term. It’s meant to value black people as ‘less than’. So yes, it is systemic because it reinforces an already existing system. That’s why ‘nigha’ is a reclamation. And back to your point, exactly what systemic disadvantages do white people face because they are white? (If you cannot answer this, dont bother answering me). And I am not racist. Especially because racism is the systemic form of racial oppression that disadvantages people with the least proximity to whiteness.
[–]PlatinumBeetle 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
"Straight white male" has become a racial slur in some circles, one which reinforces the disparity in equality between straight white males and others.
You are confusing race and economic class, while black people are more likely to be of lower economic class than white people (admittedly for reasons of intense historical racism of whites against blacks, among other reasons having to do with more current race relations) and this disadvantages them as a group and on average as individuals, there are also plenty of black people in higher classes and white people in lower classes as well. That's a thing.
Seperate class and gender from race and the racism against black people suddenly looks a ton less serious, to the point anti-white racism is roughly comparable in severity under different but highly common circumstances. And if you don't seperate demographics like that and go the intersectionality route then racism against white people seems a lot more serious then it does when you do seperate them because straight white males face a lot of it today. Mostly because of people like you, frankly.
I don't claim that black people don't face negative racism, or that it is justified, or that there aren't common circumstances where it is much greater than the negative racism that white people face.
However, all the racism black people currently face is less ubiquitous and intense than the similar sexism males face and they are more allowed to complain and receive sympathy about it so let's try to keep some proper perspective on all of this shall we?
(How strongly are you for men's rights anyway? Since the sexism against males is clearly more frequent, more intense, more official, and less addressed than the racism against black people you need to be against sexism towards men at least as much as you are against racism towards black people or else you are a hypocrite right there.)
And white people face racism too, it also isn't justified, and there are some circumstances where it is greater than the racism black people face.
Being presumed to be racist is a disadvantage in a society that officially abhors racism, particularly when you are interacting with someone who can't be treated as racist no matter how racist they are. Black people can always claim to be the victim of racism and always claim to not be the perpetrator of racism regardless of the circumstances and there is always a significant number of people who will believe them.
That is a form of privilege! And it is widespread enough that refusing to call it systematic only makes sense if you also refuse to call any private racism systematic, such as any fucking thing I could ever do.
You have no idea how it feels to not hold a victim card in a society where victimhood is social power.
And affirmative action is a clear example of institutionalized racism against white people, and it is more official than anything black people face.
That is less serious than some things black people face but it is more systematic than anything they do, so by the definitions you are giving me white people are clearly more the victims of racism than black people, who face more informal things. When your definitions mean whites are treated that much more racist than blacks despite you believing blacks are treated much more racist than whites then perhaps something is seriously wrong with your semantics.
If you want white people to believe back people face racism than you need to define racism in a way that includes things black people actually face. There are no laws saying it's more okay to discriminate against black people than white people while the reverse isn't true. I'd call the legal system the most systemic thing there is. I don't think it makes any sense not to.
Not getting accepted for a job or education because of your skin color is racism isn't it? If not what is? And if it is legally allowed or even enforced and you have no legal recourse how is that not systemic? And how would you feel if when you complain about it not only are you not viewed as the victim of racism, but you are actually viewed as racist yourself? Can you even imagine what that is like for a white person?
Don't give me that "white people are racist so racism against them doesn't count". If it's okay to blame innocent people for what others of their race have done and actively withhold opportunities from them because of it and that doesn't count as racism then no black person in modern America ever faces racism. What are you going to point to as examples of racism against blacks? Police and court bias? What is the difference between this: "White people commit more racism, especially systemic racism, so it's okay to presume they are racists and not treat them fairly" and this: "Black people commit more crime, especially violent crime, so it's okay to presume they are criminals and not treat them fairly"? If the first thing isn't racism then how can the second one be?
If the worst things black people face for being black aren't racist then your definitions are screwed up. Simply applying your standards fairly would do that.
Semantics won't save you from being a bigot. White people aren't going to put up with this forever.
Where do you think Trump and the alt-right came from? Why do you think racism from white people against black people is on the rise? Here's a hint: if you push any group of people hard enough for long enough they will eventually fight back. It's your fault. (Not saying I approve here, but I can't blame them. I don't like this, but it seems sort of inevitable to me.)
Why the fuck should we care what blacks think anymore? From our perspective they are mostly all a bunch of racist hypocrites. You have no problem treating me badly when I haven't even done anything just because some other white people are racist hypocrites, so how could you judge me if I decided to treat actual racist hypocrites badly? The majority of black people are open about being that! All they have to do is agree with you, and they do.
How am I supposed to judge other white people for being subconsciously or implicitly racially prejudiced when more black people are consciously and explicitly prejudiced towards white people than the reverse? How can I judge personally unprejudiced white people for not standing up against other white people's racial prejudice if I don't judge personally unprejudiced black people for not standing up against other black people's prejudice? The more I'm against racism the more I will dislike black people, because they aren't even trying to not be racist. How are you going to respond to that? By saying that black people shouldn't be held responsible for what other black people do, I shouldn't assume they as individuals are prejudiced or tolerant of prejudice without good reason, or that collective or informal power doesn't matter? Apply any of that logic to white people and your standards of what counts as racism largely collapse. Stop being such a racist!
I will be not racist by my own standards, fuck yours
White people tried to not be racist, you wouldn't let them, no matter what we are always racist to you. How can you blame us for being what you clearly want? You effectively want us to be racist since you demand we always be considered it, so why not? Why shouldn't I be racist? Clearly not for any reason you would accept in my place, because you are a racist anyway. Have you ever even tried to imagine how you would react if you were a white person treated how you and people like you treat them?
If white people held the vast majority of power then why do you think racism started being considered bad? Because white people agreed that it is. White people are more generous towards black people then the reverse, we have been for more than a generation now. It's either that or the power differential is not as much as you think it is. Perhaps it is a little bit of both. Maybe we are all responsible for our own actions regardless of what others do.
Like half of white people agree with you, actively embracing your standards of racism even though it disadvantages them collectively. Where are all the black people standing up for us? Where are they?
You don't have enough standards about how their race treats mine to judge almost anyone from my race for how they treat theirs. Forget about what technically is or isn't racism. How about fairness?
Word games don't negate double standards.
[–]nixxiepixie -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If "white male" somehow reinforces the disparity between races, how could "white male" ever be a pejorative? If the problem is economic class and not racism, how come a black kid whose parents are in the top 5% of earners, who lives in a great neighborhood will earn about as much money and has roughly the same likelihood of ending up in poverty as a poor white kid living in a poor neighborhood? Also, white people cannot face racism: the system of oppression that directly disadvantages people with the least proximity to whiteness. Also the sexism males face are made up. The racism black people face are not. The oppression that men face are at a direct result of the patriarchy, toxic masculinity, and gender roles. The oppression black people face are a direct result of white supremacy, racism, ignorance, and suppression. Also being able to face racism is not a privilege, you weird ass. How is victimhood social power when victims HARDLY ever put their assailants away? How is victimhood social power when victim-blaming is so bad that everyone looks to victims for the why and never the perpetrator. Also affirmative action does NOT harm or disadvantage white people. In fact all affirmative action does is give opportunities to minorities-which it has been successful in doing. Especially for white women. Racism is on the rise because Trump empowered the alt-right. He showed them that they can do and say anything and not face repercussions because that's how badly bigorty against minorities is protected. You should care what blacks think because they are people that are part of your society. And you sound like "how can I blame him for abusing her when she dislikes him" hurt feelings will never equal systemic opression. Casual racism is still racism and is probably more toxic than blatant racism because you can't prosecute casual racism. White people hold the majority of power and racism started becoming bad because a good percent of the population was being ill-treated and not all white people are psychopaths. And do you want me to thank white people for abolishing slavery? Like thank you for finally seeing me as human and showing me humanity? And why would black people have to stand up for you? What adversity to you face because you are white?
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Learn what words mean.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It's nauseating...
[–]Kyonkanno 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They can't see the beam on their own eyes. Point out how they're being racist/sexist and they will shout "WhEn YoU'rE uSeD tO oPpReSsIoN, eQuAlItY fEeLs LiKe OpPrEsSiOn".
[–]breadfag -91 points-90 points-89 points 6 years ago* (35 children) | Copy Link
Probably because it's an easier sell.
"Think of the men!" Doesn't work so well, as we can see.
[–]WithBothNostrils 42 points43 points44 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
That's why it's fine for black bankers to spit on white homeless people, because of racial power structure /s
[+]breadfag -57 points-56 points-55 points 6 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
Tbh i dont think its hate for children. Its hate for eachother. Same with my situation as a alienated father. I made sure along with our mom and dad that all the kids got a nice xmas. But their thought process is why alienation is a huge existing problem and has been for decades
[–]Icerith 12 points13 points14 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Why isn't it fine, though? Maybe because it's racist? Piss off.
[+]breadfag -14 points-13 points-12 points 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
Crowd source a litigation fund via a viral social media campaign. Take them to court via a private litigation action. Give the damages to a men’s charity. I’ll donate.
[–]Icerith 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
We are assuming racism. When you take racism out of the situation, of course it's still bad. We aren't talking about "why it's still bad", though. We're talking about why it's racist.
All things that are racist are still bad even when you remove race as a relevant factor. Hate crimes, banks denying loans, unequal hiring or housing opportunity... there is not a non-bad racist thing under the sun. It's a moot point.
Systemic power of racism makes no sense, as the idea is as simple as it can be. Does a person not like you because of the way you were born? Then it's bigotry, further detailed down into racism, sexism, etc. Where does systemic power come into play here?
The truth of the matter is that the movement that believes "systemic power + prejudice = racism" only believe that for two reasons:
[–]HungryHornyHigh 30 points31 points32 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
So if I go to Africa I can call the local populace Nwords and its okay because they're in power there?
[+]breadfag -12 points-11 points-10 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
“More unpaid care and domestic work.”
“Reduced employment.”
In spite of the male unemployment rate being .2 percentage points higher?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/193298/unadjusted-unemployment-rate-of-women-in-the-us/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/193935/seasonally-adjusted-monthly-unemployment-rate-of-men-in-the-us/
“Limited maternity benefits.”
“Gender-based occupational segregation.”
“Gender pay gaps.”
“Higher rates of poverty in old age.”
[–]NtWEdelweiss 14 points15 points16 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
See and this is why this racism definition depending on who is in power is bs. It's just as bad to call a black American a n****r as it is to call a black African that word. It's insane to me you are even entertaining the idea of situations in which it would be "acceptable" to call someone that. This all goes for racism against any other races as well. There is no acceptable form of racism and if there is it sure as shit shouldn't be based on something vague and arbitrary as who is in power.
[–]breadfag -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Yea. You'd have to be like lottery chance unlucky (or stupid) to have an entire family kidnapped in broad daylight in a public place. That or they'd have to have super powers.
[–][deleted] 35 points36 points37 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Cry all you want mayo
You racist POS. Fuck you, the twisted definition you pulled from wikipedia (lmao) and the racist horse you ride on.
[+]breadfag1 points 6 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
fuck you too, you brazilian monkey, and the tree you swing from
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
There it is, the racist's true colors.
Congratulations.
Edit: Loser deleted his own comment, for whomever may be curious, this pos searched my history and figured I'm Brazilian, called me a monkey and told me to go back to the tree where I "swang" from.
You will be called out for your racism here, bud. I am proud to be who I am and of my country of origin.
[–]jonnyhaldane 25 points26 points27 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Not true that it's ALL. Also that argument really works if you judge everyone on their group identity. People are individuals and most individuals do not have 'power'.
Edit: Nice job editing your post, pussy.
[–]Master_Darth_Doggo 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You are a shame to the rest of us gays.
[–]__pulsar 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Wikipedia is trash and you are racist as hell.
[–]Mindraker 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Wikipedia is trash
Glad someone else realizes this.
[–]DignifiedAlpaca 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Scholars, also commonly define racism not only in terms of individual prejudice, but also in terms of a power structure that protects the interests of the dominant culture and actively discriminates against ethnic minorities.
Your own source disagrees with you. It says plain as day that these "scholars" commonly define racism in the manner you are suggesting. So the implication is that there are times that they don't define it that way.
If there is more than one definition of the word in use, why would you deliberately choose to use the most confusing and obnoxious one? This isn't a serious way of arguing with people.
[–]breadfag -4 points-3 points-2 points 6 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link
I guess dad's get paid for being a father?? (Even though it's the other way around with child support.)
[–]ENVIDEOUS 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
And yet, slavery was still wrong when the majority believed otherwise. Your logic is faulty.
[–]breadfag -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Eh. You can be nude within your own home. This isn't indecent exposure. You can even be nude in front of windows, and even open doors. No one has the right to look in your doors or windows, and you legally have the expectation of privacy while home.
However, this could more likely be classed as sexual harassment. Even that's a weak maybe, as nudity isn't specifically sexual, and unless they attempted to interact sexually with him, or touched him, I doubt a court would care.
The best bet is child pornography, as again, he is 17, and was featured in a clip that was clearly meant to be used for things of a sexual nature.
[–]ENVIDEOUS 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Still doesn't hold. If the majority believe something hard enough it doesn't make it so.
The commonly held view of racism, according to Wikipedia, is as you've quoted but that doesn't make it right....like slavery.
[–]breadfag -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
She does have a criminal conviction for filing a false police report that alleged rape.
The person standing up for the accused is actually the judge that ruled the evidence inadmissable. The judge is essentially saying, "the law is forcing me to rule this way, and it's wrong, so we need to change the law." As an attorney, I think this is a matter of interpretation. A history of criminal charges for filing false rape complaints is not sexual history in my opinion. In certain scenarios, no sex would have even occurred, yet it's deemed inadmissable for bringing up the victims fictitious sexual history.
[–]DignifiedAlpaca 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think it's more that a minority of scholars define it differently.
No, it's just a scam. You might want to watch this video if you have time to set aside for it:
And when a minority of scholars call the earth flat, deny climate change, or claim vaccines cause autism, we don't take them seriously either.
Those are completely different kinds of scenarios though. In those scenarios, someone would be denying objective reality. In the scenario with "scholars" talking about racism, it's just a disagreement over which definition should be used for a word.
If I decided to use the word racism to mean driving cars, I wouldn't be denying science in any way. I would just be using a different definition than everybody else, which would hamper communication no doubt, but it's not the same as disagreeing with actual facts.
And don't you notice how suspicious it is that they decided to take that oh-so-powerful word, racism, the one that stops any serious conversation short, that so effectively brings an opponent to their knees in their immediate quest to deny the accusation, and replaced its common sense definition with one that conveniently excludes white people, thus robbing white people of the opportunity to use this powerful word in their own linguistic arsenal? You honestly don't think there's even a slight chance that the "scholars" who came up with this definition were trying to give themselves an unfair advantage when debating with white people who complain about situations where they happen to be the ones who feel they are being targeted by racism?
[–]Icerith 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No, when scholars make a claim with zero evidence, we don't take them seriously. Has nothing to so with the amount of scholars making the claim. Anyone who believes that is a moron and is going to be easily indoctrinated when businesses pay for scholars to "agree mostly" on a subject.
[–]Nybaz 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Since we are nearing the end od the year, you decided to go all in to win the "most idiotic comment 2019" award?
[–]Septiimus 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Honestly I'm impressed. That's what you tell sports teams: "don't stop playing until the last buzzer" sneaking in a most idiotic comment in the closing weeks of the year is consistent with that.
[–]ETF_Ross101 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
https://youtu.be/ZqqdmRUGoOA
The whole idea that "P+P=R" is a lie fabricated to place blame on whiyes and western society.
[–]Consilio_et_Animis 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Scholars...
"Scholars" LOL. You must be joking. You mean rabid left-wing feminist "lecturers" who make shit-up all day. And when they are not doing that, they are "editing" Wikipedia.
[–]McDorable 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
So your saying you cant be racist against asians in asia. Or africans in africa. Cool. Your a moron.
[–]breadfag 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Just a reminder that posts about getting banned from other subs are considered SPAM under rule 7.
It's such a common occurrence that we don't want to clog up the sub with posts about it.
[–]flies_with_owls 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You're
[–]McDorable 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You're isnt a sentence. Are you attempting to correct my grammar or something? I just dont understand. Oh well
[–]iainmf[M] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Your comment breaks rule 10. Broad generalisation about a whole group is not allowed. IE 'You can't be racist against white people' and 'whites hold all of the power'.
If you want to raise these issues then it would be better to say "I think it is impossible to be racist towards the dominant group" or "It looks to me like white people hold most of the power". This makes it clear that it is your opinion and you are open to discussion and not a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.
[–]breadfag 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
Sources https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/2019-update-for-every-100-girls-part-iii/
[–]iainmf 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Your comment got multiple reports and I was responding to those. People who reported your comment also hold a similar option that your comment broke rule 10. In any case, my opinion as a mod carries more weight regarding this matter.
I chose the least invasive option of responding to your comment rather than removing it or using a temporary ban.
Reddit admins will restrict or remove subs that violate their terms on racism etc. We are a controversial sub, so it is especially important to encourage following the rules and to also enforce the rules.
Often people assume that others understand the subtext of what they are saying, or they think others know the shorthand they are using, but on the internet that is not true. So it is important to add additional context if people what to be clear.
Merry Xmas, I hope you enjoy your day.
[–]ElectraUnderTheSea 197 points198 points199 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Maybe the Bank of England didn't appoint a woman because the most qualified candidate happened to be a man...
This kind of mindset is horrible for women and an absolute step backwards: anytime a woman is appointed to anything important, people will wonder if she's there because she was indeed the best for the job or because of gender politics - thus undermining the journey, achievements and talent of truly great people.
[–]Drone_Better 36 points37 points38 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The (female) city diversity-promoter even told the (female) reporter that "The role should never have been given to a woman just because of her gender", and then goes on to explain how the Bank of England isn't diverse enough. r/SelfAwareWolves material here.
[–]jasperhaan 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
i dont think its “appoint the best man or woman” its “appoint the best human being”
who fucking cares if its a man or a woman
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 103 points104 points105 points 6 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-50872107
This is from BBC news, Which is like the national channel and even receives tax money (Check that I'm not certain) , Raised it with my family and they said it's because they have only ever appointed men
[–]TheGreatConst 90 points91 points92 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
They don't appoint someone because they are men. They appoint someone because they are more competent than 99,99999% of other people. I'm a white man, but for some strange reason, I wasn't appointed to be the governor of the Bank. Maybe because I'm not competent enough for this work? The question should be - why there weren't any black transgender lesbian woman who was more competent than him? Because if such a person existed then they would be appointed instead of Bailey!
For some reason, people are fine with the fact that most criminals are men. They even fine with the fact that men outperform women almost at all kinds of sport. But when you point out the fact that most outstanding scientists, businessmen, and politicians are men as well - you are, suddenly, a sexist and women are discriminated in science, politics and business. Lol.
[–]geniice 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
They appoint someone because they are more competent than 99,99999% of other people.
Eh questionable. The problem is pretty much anyone qualified and competent has said something negative about brexit. Andrew Bailey has been rather more careful. The result is that after most qualified and competent candidates have been ruled out for political reasons Andrew Bailey isn't a terrible choice.
[–]TheGreatConst 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Being able to see the political consequences of one's actions and words is a part of being competent as well. It just means that in current circumstances you should be competent in politics as well if you want to succeed in finances.
[–]geniice 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Being able to see the political consequences of one's actions and words is a part of being competent as well.
Oh well in that case Bailey still isn't particularly competent because he accepted that job at the FCA. Which depending on your POV either explosed his incompetence or where he was set up to fail (in which case a politicaly competent person wouldn't have accepted it).
It would also not have been unreasonable for economists to conclude that after the previous appointment (Mark Carney) that the goverment would prefer competence over political convience.
[–]Azurenightsky 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The result is that after most qualified and competent candidates have been ruled out for political reasons
Hold up.
Politic in regard to CENTRAL BANKS, is absolutely essential and part of the cornerstone of whether or not one should have any access to such a position of power.
Not so. The reason the ability to set interest rates was moved from the chancellor to the bank of england was to make rate setting nominaly non political.
Translation having a vagina entitles me to a man's hard earned money
[–]Azurenightsky 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Only half true. Knowing how the web works is far more effective than knowing the right person. Because knowing the Spiders Web also teaches you how to spot the Plants.
[–]nattdr 26 points27 points28 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
can confirm, we do pay a "tv licence" fee to the goverment to fund the bbc, even if you dont watch the bbc
[–]Gohorne 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
The License fee goes directly to the BBC, not the Government. And you don't have to pay it if you want to watch non-live, non-BBC broadcasting such as All4 or ITVHub.
It also pays for the maintenance of the TV network infrastructure, BBC radio, BBC World Service, BBC Online and in this instance, BBC News.
[–]janearcade 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
You have to pay a tv license in Ireland if you own a tv, full stop.
[–]Gohorne 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
True, but this isn’t the BBC TV License.
[–]janearcade 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Right. I think ours funds RTE.
[–]HenryCGk 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
But you do have to pay it to watch ITV brodcasts or Sky Sports who get no money from the License fee
[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Not directly, but they do use the infrastructure that it pays for.
[–]HenryCGk 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
My understanding was that it is all hypothicated to the BBC
So what infrastructure do you mean?
[–]NecroHexr 16 points17 points18 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It's written by some freelancer, I googled her, found her twitter, and she reads as your stereotypical braindead feminist
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
That's a smart thing to do, Someone was asking about taking action and maybe that's the way
[–]NecroHexr 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
If you are suggesting a witch hunt, I advise against it. She's the type to laugh at haters and regard them as success, so just leave her be.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't know about his intention but I think he wants to make a complaint or something. I also wouldn't advise this
[–]TheStumblingWolf 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Quite sure, in the case of a bank, if there was a female candidate they thought would be better at making them money than anyone else they'd hire her. Somehow these people think being a certain gender is a qualification.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, Race/gender are seen as qualifications. I'm not into politics but whenever I see a female/non-white female they never seem to fail in mentioning the fact they are a women or POS
[–]geniice 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Quite sure, in the case of a bank, if there was a female candidate they thought would be better at making them money
You don't know what the bank of england is do you?
[–]Azurenightsky 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I'd go so far as to wager 99.99% of the General Population haven't the foggiest idea about the Central Bank of England and how essential it is, not to mention the London Bank, Vatican Bank and the Federal Reserve in America.
If people really understood what was being done to them, good Lord, you can't imagine the blood that would be shed.
[–]geniice 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'd go so far as to wager 99.99% of the General Population haven't the foggiest idea about the Central Bank of England
Its called the Bank of England and they do. Both for historical reasons (interest rate decisions impacting variable rate mortgages which were very common) and more recent involvement with the aftermath of the credit crunch.
[–]uselubewithcondoms 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't understand what you mean by the last part. Will you explain?
[–]Nybaz 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So? I guess women should get better
[–]xNOM 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
HAHAHAHAH. Oh sweet summer child... 😭
[–]mr_woodles123 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes, we have to pay for television licence if we watch the BBC on our TV's and if we are caught watching it they take you to court an fine you massively. Luckily in the elections a couple weeks back, the conservatives got a large majority and are looking at decriminalizing the non payment of the licence fee.
[–]jonnyhaldane 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The BBC isn't giving its own opinion here though. It's reporting what others are saying.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That's how they will avoid blame and any possible legal consequences. They choose what stories and what options they want to show everyone
[–]auMatech 146 points147 points148 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Well if the bank appoints a woman cause of "diversity", it's time to leave the bank. Immediately
[+]Ctrl_Alt_Abstergo1 points 6 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
Uh, it’s England’s central bank... there’s no “leaving” it.
[–]j1ggl 54 points55 points56 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Leave England then.
Thank me later.
[–]bsapavel 24 points25 points26 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Just leave the EU as a whole. Oh, wait.
That's why Bitcoin was invented: to have another option aside from central bank fiat.
[–]Drone_Better 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Hey, I have an idea. Instead of just choosing females who aren't the best people for the job (which is what the article seems to be implying we should do), we should choose Prime Ministers based on gender, not whether they've won elections.
Actually, the constituency system is already horrifically undemocratic, it wouldn't change anything.
[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Get a phone book and call 75 numbers randomly. Tell them to come to a Bingo room with you and use the roll thingy with the small ping pong balls to get them and assign random government functions to them, and the 75th is prime minister.
75 is because Bingo has 75 possibilities, I don't know how many seats there are.
[–]Drone_Better 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Then homeless people without phones can't become Prime Ministers. Gamer time. 😎
Edit: Also, u/SchalaZeal01 is an agent of chaos.
[–]Lion_amongst_gods 42 points43 points44 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
While many have welcomed opinions on Andrew Bailey's appointment as the new governor of the Bank of England, some suggested that Nell Mackenzie has one flaw: he or she or whatever is an identity politics pushing retard.
[–]pavlikmmm 28 points29 points30 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Always loved thees kind of titles, juat change the white man to a "any race" woman and yeah watch your half-assed attempt at journalism get taken down
[–]firehydrant_man 19 points20 points21 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
r/menkampf
[–]pavlikmmm 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Fucking hell buddy. I thougth good comedy is dead on reddit, but hell this, this is a fucking comedy goldmine
[–]Silencio00 18 points19 points20 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It blows my mind how this is not considered racist and sexist. Sad times.
[–][deleted] 28 points29 points30 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Honest question is there anything I can do about this? I live in the UK I’m English my taxes go towards this shit, it’s 100% sexism and racism
Can I complain? Can I reported to the police as a hate crime? I’m not actually joking looking for an honest answer.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I don't think so man, It's the world we live in now, I think all you can really do to avoid it is relocate to a smaller city or town or just ignore it. I wish there was some legal thing we could do but I don't think enough people see it this way yet. Maybe you can comment on the story or start a petition?
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Also the BBC are clever in the way they word their articles to seem impartial, so they’ll write “some say“ or “it has been suggested”
So technically it’s not the opinion of the BBC they are just reporting what “someone else has said”
(Hint it’s actually just the author of the article’s thoughts)
[–]carlsberg24 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Of course that's what they do. However, if they reported, for example, "some say that women should be subservient to their husbands", it would be framed in a way where it's clear they denounce the view. Here it's just business as usual. Yeah, some say we should be sexist against white men. No biggie, carry on.
Yeah your right
[–]NorskChef 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
https://www.stophateuk.org/
[–]Crooklar 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I’d like to know this too?
Ofcom? Parliament? The police - it’s a hate crime after all!
[–]minecraftme123 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Cancel your tv license
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
It really seizes to amaze me. The majority of people MUST be able to think logically and come to the conclusion that this is hypocritical and wrong regardless of what race or gender they are, But the second you start a conversation about it you get ignored or accused
[–]w_cruice 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You have too much faith in humanity...
[–]BrobdingnagianMember 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
* never ceases to amaze
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Cheers,I've never had to spell that word before, Thought it kind of made sense like a seizure or something haha
[–]BrobdingnagianMember 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No worries.
Homonyms and phrases can make for some great /r/boneappletea moments. :)
[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Imagine that! A white man on Island of predominantly white people. Oh look! He's getting a job! What? This is real and not Monty Python? Astounding! (Please use sarcastic British accent.)
[–]agentsika 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Lets switch the words: "one flaw: she is a black woman." How racist and sexist does it sound now? But of course these large news companies are allowed to make blatantly sexist and racist statements, as long as its a white male.
[–]kingmayo -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
What if instead of the headline being why did they hire a white male - it was why didn’t they hire someone of a race and gender that is underrepresented in the banking executive world?
Would you have then chosen not to complain?
[–]agentsika 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
People shouldn't have to choose someone off of their race or gender. Thats still racism and sexism, no matter whether theyre underrepresented or not. People should be chosen or hired for positions based on their skill. If the most skilled bank governor was a Muslim black woman, great! As long as she is skilled and does the job well.
[–]weedislif 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
As a woman I would rather a qualified man then a unqualified woman
No brainer
[–]Wildwest21 18 points19 points20 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
This is why I am glad to not live in England. As bad as this new culture is in America, it’s 10 times worse in England.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 15 points16 points17 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
The BBC is constantly doing this shit, If I had anywhere else to go I would. Im seen as some kind of right wing extremist for disagreeing with this shit - and i vote labour (Equivalent of the democrats kind of)
[–]MakeGasNotWar 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I don't understand nor am interested in the politics side of life, but the BBC do this on football as well. BBC recently did a top 10 article regarding the most iconic football moments of the decade and somehow managed to shoehorn the Womens team getting into the Semi-Final of a World Cup as iconic.
Classic, You only have to watch the morning news once to see their agenda
[–]Khufu2589 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You voted for Corbyn, and Jess Philips?
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Normally I don't vote, but this year I voted labour
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Wish I could move there
[–]double-happiness 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
It's actually terrifying as a middle-aged white male from a deprived background still trying to get my career off the ground, knowing I could very well be subject to this kind of discrimination. I've never had a full-time job in spite of having a degree and postgrad, and IIRC my longest spell in regular employment was 4 months (though I've been self-employed for much longer, albeit at sub-minimum wage), but I'm now doing a second degree in the hope I can finally get somewhere. It makes me sick to think a woman or PoC from a privileged background, possibly many years younger than me, could get preferential treatment just because of their race or gender, even though I grew up dirt poor and have always had to struggle.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah many of us are in the same boat as you mate. A women or poc that grew up wealthy will likely demonize us and say we are privileged. I wish you the best in your job search
[–]double-happiness 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Many thanks! :)
[–]Highground69420 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What the fuck
[–]SharedRegime 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
If being a white male is considered a flaw can they stop pretending like they arent racist and sexist? Because only to a racist and sexist would someones skin color and sex be considered a flaw.
EDIT: Changed the last bit to make it sound much more harsh towards the racist/exist then it was. No quarter for racists and sexists.
[–]teureg 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Imagine Diane Abbott lmao
[–]accountancyisboring 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well by the same standards, she would have one key flaw: being a black female.
Lmao gold
[–]Tmomp 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Do they suggest countries with non-white majorities promote more whites or majority female professions promote more men?
If so, I would commend their consistency, but we all know they don't.
Equality = less white males
[–]blueorange22_ 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
What we’re seeing is a process of graduation socialization of dehumanization. Imagine children growing up and always seeing messages like this, they are conditioned to see “white males” as not regular people, but as “others.” This could lead to a troubling future.
I agree, Everyone I have showed this too is completely okay about it
It's the exact opposite with me as an adult white male:
Everyday people sing the praises of women and minorities just for breathing, nevermind doing something "Revolutionary" in a white male dominated job/hobby, it's already had an adverse effect where any woman in a high, prestigious position begins their speech of appreciation I start reflexively cringing in anticipation of yet another condemnation of men as a group to the applause of the brainwashed masses sitting/standing before her.
Not productive, not healthy yes. But it's an honest feeling and something I can no longer torture myself holding in.
[–]Opinion12345 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
How is this NOT racist and sexist????
It is.
We've just given society the gravitas to insult and demean a group of people.
You are rewarded for hating white men.
It's a terrible example to be setting for children. Two wrongs don't make a right. That's what I was always taught and it has served me well in life.
I wonder how things would have turned out for me if I was taught "you must wrong a certain group of people because they are your overlords".
Imagine that mentality. It's sick and demented.
[–]SpiritedProgrammer 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Fuck I'm white , I better kms .
[–]RavynArcadia 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Maybe the selection of women available weren't as fit for the job as him? Hard concept to understand I suppose for some people.
[–]theLeftHatesReality 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Imagine the title with “black woman”
[–]OlofPalmeBurnInHell 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
or even better with "jew"
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Funnily enough he is Jewish, So the person knows they can't say Jew but white man is no problem
[–]carlsberg24 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Holy crap. I almost thought that this is some photoshop. Nope, real BBC News article. Grab screen prints, save the text.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I saw it on a MGTOW post at first so I had to double check, Unbelievable
[–]carlsberg24 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Here's the link for anyone who cares to check: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50872107
[–]DignifiedAlpaca 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Here is an archived version so that people don't have to reward the BBC with ad revenue for printing this rubbish:
https://web.archive.org/web/20191224151609/https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50872107
[–]LSD_FamilyMan 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Hes Jewish so hes a minority
[–]PlatinumBeetle 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Also, he is a man so he is a minority. Not nearly as small of one though.
Then again men are only a minority because we die earlier and more often. Males are actually a slight majority at bith.
[–]civicmon 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
This is flat out absurd.
Janet Yellen was the Federal Reserve chief (basically the equivalent of the head of the back of England) and, obviously, was a woman. She did a fantastic job. This is from someone who worked on a trading desk during her entire tenure.
Clearly, he wasn’t chosen due to his gender and/or race, but is because he’s most qualified.
If I was a British taxpayer funding the BBC, I’d file a complaint about this drivel being written.
Edit: I won’t name the person who tried to chat me saying “yellen suck” but that’s petty of you. Just saying.
[–]1LegendaryWombat 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Better question is...why does it matter to you lady?
How on earth does this impact you in any way?
[–]thefudmaster 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Forget qualifications. Let’s put Caitlin Jenner there. Who cares if they fail so long as they are woke.
[+]Earthican_Male1 points 6 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
It's okay to be a white male.
You fucking nazi
[–]ctwise12 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Holy shit can you believe it a WHITE PERSON in ENGLAND
👏🏻👏🏻RACISM👏🏻👏🏻IS👏🏻👏🏻RACISM
[–]mallozzin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
While many have welcomed Andrea Bailey's appointment as the new governor of the Bank of England some suggested she has one key flaw: She is a black woman.
[–]anonymous4u 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Include the publisher in the screen grab.
[–]WarOfNoise 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
you should read the whole article. it gets even better (worse)
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I don't have the courage
[–]WarOfNoise 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
i understand, friend. truly i do
[–]MrWhiteside97 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
When you read the article, the content isn't that bad
Ms Shah says his appointment highlights "significant structural issues" in the pipeline of talent at the Bank. "The role should never have been given to a woman just because of her gender," she says. But she thinks the "entire structure" of the Bank - including those on its committees who could one day become governor - is "not very diverse".
Ms Shah says his appointment highlights "significant structural issues" in the pipeline of talent at the Bank.
"The role should never have been given to a woman just because of her gender," she says.
But she thinks the "entire structure" of the Bank - including those on its committees who could one day become governor - is "not very diverse".
It's a sensationalist way to lead into a pretty reasonable talking point
I wonder what would happen if people started asking "why another Jewish person?" about these kinds of things?
Would it be poorly received? I think so. It would demonstrate the absurdity of it all.
Like, let's get pissed if another tall black guy is picked number 1 in the NBA draft lol
As boss of City regulator the Financial Conduct Authority, Mr Bailey has lots of experience and is well qualified for his new job.
Sure sounds like there’s sweet fuck all wrong with their choice to me.
[–]ulgulanoth 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Who the hell is complaining that he is both white and male? I'm a Brit and happy we have someone competent in charge of the bank
I think the problem is that not enough people are complaining about the blatant racism and sexism of the BBC,This hatred for white males has become normalised
[–]Mindraker 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
BBC is very sexist, we all know this.
[–]TibortheChechen 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Let's hope Boris can defund it.
[–]amakoviney 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This shit is starting to make me fucking sick
[–]SpecialPea 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Damn White people and their squints Y-chromosomes
[–]gamessuck00 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Denounce it and demand others do, and do what they do don’t let them joke about it. Hopefully someone will sue over this shit and maybe we can turn the tide.
It’s become an assault on the existence of a creed of men, and it’s starting to have a crippling societal effect.
Being a child of the 80s, I saw the beginning of it. I was told it was what I deserved and that it was all about bringing balance. Nearly 40 years later, it has brought harm and trauma, to the point many white men have embraced the “cuck syndrome”.
They lay down in the face of aggression, they happily embrace stereotypes (can’t dance, can’t jump, small dick, weak willed, racist), and that being guilty for all the faults of the world is their cross to bare. Enough! We have to stop this now!
Yep I feel the exact same.
[–]gamessuck00 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Child of the 80s as well I assume? We have to make a stand.
[–]Dunkolunko 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I resign today as president of the bank.
[–]CrazyCBoiiii 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
the person who is more qualified deserves the position, just because there’s a woman who has a pipe dream of having that job doesn’t mean she deserves to get it. that man probably worked his ass off for countless years for a chance at that position, but just because he has a dick it’s a whole fucking problem.
[–]DignifiedAlpaca 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20191224151609/https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50872107
[–]Sissy_That_Keyboard 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well obviously he was a diversity hire. /s
[–]fogoticus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Since when is it such a huge issue to be a white male in charge?
The fuck is this disgusting level of hateful sexism? And what is that shit news website?
[–]TheGriefersCat 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Who gives a shit who is put in as the minister, no matter what their skin tone, gender identity, orientation or affiliated non-violent group. These people, clearly.
[–]meggamatty64 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Imagine this but replace white man with colored woman and watch the media shreak
[–]not_a_fracking_cylon 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Because his accusers can't count, thats two things. Critical skill for running a bank lol.
[–]TigPlaze 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
How dare they hire based on qualifications while ignoring a feminist quota agenda? But I'm sure denying someone a position based on his race and gender wouldn't have been racist or sexist at all. /S
Ever the worst villain: the white male.
[–]dovakin123489 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Being a white male today has become like being an intelligent women in Salem. You show yourself and you get strung up and killed.
[–]El-Autismo 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Damn it, imagine if there was a way to evaluate people for their achievements instead of their age, Colour and gender...
Oh wait! There is one! And they used it when they offered him a job.
It’s a shame that there’s no way to filter your thoughts from facts... oh wait, it’s basic intelligence..
[–]SteamyyBunss 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It honestly does suck the this shit happens
[–]B1ue_Guardian 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The English are literally white?
[–]nanan00 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So? Should they appoint an illegal immigrant single mother muslim woman with zero education.
[–]AlistairH94 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes, then it fails.
[–]anoamas321 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
link to orginal article?
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
In the comments somewhere
Just checked the BBC app and yes this is real
[–]RoryTate 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well, at least they've gotten slightly embarrassed by their own bigotry and have dropped the "cis straight" portion of the "white male" ephitet. So...progress I guess?
[–]MrWhiteside97 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]AhmadZS1 points 6 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
Diversity is beneficial, but happening to be a white male is a feature, not a flaw.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Definitely beneficial to be appointed based on merit and not on politics
[–]lethrowaway4me 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Diversity is beneficial
How so? I keep seeing this sentiment but no one describes why it's beneficial. The only way I can see it being perceived as beneficial is if one were to stereotype people into blind demographics then claim everyone in their respective demographics all have the same thoughts, opinions, and choices.
Beautiful
[–]oafsalot -4 points-3 points-2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
If you know about the UK you know that the schooling these men got privileged them to a great degree. Those schools were for wealthy males who were white. And most only accept a few who are not even now.
I'm not saying it's not sexist and racist to point that out. But at the same time, it's a fucking boot on all our knecks. 99.99999% of people will never know that sort of privilege. And it's not unfair of the people who're not white nor male to point it out. Though they really should considet how that alienates all the white males for the actions of a vanishing minority.
Schools just for wealthy white men? I don't know any of these schools. Are you talking about private schools for the children of wealthy individuals? Your argument seems to be really contradictory, Make up your mind mate. Yes people born into wealthy families tend to have a better education but what has that got to do with race and gender? Side note - These top universities are not exclusive to privately educated students,They just have high academic requirements. I know people who were born into shitholes like me that went to these top universities because they studied hard in public colleges (I don't think it's important to mention but you might like it,None of these people happened to be white)
[–]oafsalot -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Just think about our last prime ministers, they all went to Eton.
Just think about it's ratio of white to non-white. It's about 40:1. And that's today, 20 years ago it was 1000:1.
Just because you're working hard in uni doesn't mean you get a place in these universities. You still need to pay for it. But more often than not the people you hear about running the government went to one. How does that work out for you?
I was born into a shithole too. I went to university, a good one. it made no difference in the end. Such things are not surities against prejudice.
Such colleges and universities do have a certain exclusivity, even today. So in a way, the nations are being run by white males. Is it wrong to point this out, I don't think so and I'm a white male.
To suggest this isn't happening is racist and prejudice. To argue it's not happening makes you a bigoted fuckwit.
We are all victims of this, doesn't matter the colour of our skin. And that's the point, to suggest it's all white males is prejudices, and problematic to the honest to gods truth.
So they happen to be white? Are you saying these schools are refusing to accept non white and white female students to those willing to pay? You might as well be talking about their hair colour. Your right, Working hard in uni isn't a guaranteed success, You have to be exceptional in all areas. Why are you talking about paying for university? Every single person is given a student loan and can go to uni if they choose to.
I have to be a bigotted racist racist fuckwit then because i completely disagree with this articles on all levels,You are talking about race and how white males are running the country and are still looking at this at an identity politics standpoint.
Fyi, No university here has any white only rules,Infact most lower the grade requirements and give out extra bursaries to those with a Carribbean background - I know this because I applied to university 2 years in a row and was turned down for them.
"Is it wrong to point that out" This article isnt merely saying - 'Oh look a white person' it's saying 'This person being a white man is a problem and be shouldn't have the job because of it'
I don't care that your white, As I said I'm not into identity politics.
[+]Skydreamer6 -24 points-23 points-22 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
I actually get this logically. If a town of 51 purple people and 49 blue always had a purple mayor, people would eventually ask 'why never blue?'. It's not like they picked a blue one this time either.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 12 points13 points14 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Where does the logic come into play here?
[+]Skydreamer6 -13 points-12 points-11 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
The question would be asked by one group by another group under any circumstances. Once we've had a few of both, THEN this kind of sentiment would be very dangerous.
So hire someone based on gender/race/sexuality a few times, Then after we have done this a few times with every possible group, We can then choose which was the best and hire people of the same gender/race/sexuality? The second part sounds silly but it's the only reason the first part would be applicable no?
[–]WolfShaman 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Well, we tried hiring based on gender/race/sexuality a few times. And now that it's a shitshow, I guess our only option is to hire based on merit. What a sad time for equality."
-those guys, probably
[–]RoryTate 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If a town of 51 purple people and 49 blue always had a purple mayor, people would eventually ask 'why never blue?'. It's not like they picked a blue one this time either.
First off, both you and the article are asking a very loaded and ultimately incorrect question. People aren't just picked for the job; they have to work hard for decades to rise to a level where they are on an extremely short list of people eligible for the job. The role has qualifications and requirements that are extraordinary, so pretending that "picking" is all there is to this result is disingenuous and dishonest.
Next, the article's author doesn't actually consider even their own poorly formed question. They instead jump right to the "structural issues" answer, and never investigate whether there are differences in interest, ability, or some other reason for the discrepancy. This suggests they had a bias at the outset, and ended up finding only what they wanted to see.
Lastly, the article goes even further than "why no blue?", and immediately suggests that there is something inherently wrong with being purple (or in this case a white male). Those characteristics are "flawed" in some invisible way, like a defective machine. This concept of "abnormalcy" is pounded into the mind of the reader again and again throughout the screed. Unfortunately, this ignorant attitude against males is a large reason why there is no similar push for diversity in female-dominated fields like education, psychology, child care, etc. Since men are broken, untrustworthy, selfish, and only to be feared, there is no benefit seen from having them involved in any profession.
[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
But its the blue people who are in top-level finance sector. A sector utterly dominated by men already.
It's like if I asked why a cat veterinarian is more often a woman. Well 80% women in pet veterinarian. Even if women are 51% of population.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]Nybaz 872 points873 points874 points (76 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 329 points330 points331 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[–]coolysean 108 points109 points110 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]lethrowaway4me 89 points90 points91 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]FlatTire2005 82 points83 points84 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Azurenightsky 38 points39 points40 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mackowatosc 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mackowatosc 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Phrodo_00 20 points21 points22 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]northstraw 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BlueLadybug92 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Maann1 23 points24 points25 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]KaydenD10 30 points31 points32 points (22 children) | Copy Link
[+]nixxiepixie -46 points-45 points-44 points (21 children) | Copy Link
[–]Azurenightsky 19 points20 points21 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]nixxiepixie 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]janearcade -20 points-19 points-18 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Icerith 11 points12 points13 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Azurenightsky -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]janearcade -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Icerith 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (11 children) | Copy Link
[–]nixxiepixie -2 points-1 points0 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]nixxiepixie 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]nixxiepixie 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]PlatinumBeetle 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]nixxiepixie -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]PlatinumBeetle 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]nixxiepixie -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kyonkanno 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]breadfag -91 points-90 points-89 points (35 children) | Copy Link
[–]WithBothNostrils 42 points43 points44 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+]breadfag -57 points-56 points-55 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Icerith 12 points13 points14 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]breadfag -14 points-13 points-12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Icerith 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HungryHornyHigh 30 points31 points32 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]breadfag -12 points-11 points-10 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]NtWEdelweiss 14 points15 points16 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]breadfag -3 points-2 points-1 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 35 points36 points37 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]breadfag1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
fuck you too, you brazilian monkey, and the tree you swing from
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jonnyhaldane 25 points26 points27 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Master_Darth_Doggo 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]__pulsar 13 points14 points15 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mindraker 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DignifiedAlpaca 11 points12 points13 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]breadfag -4 points-3 points-2 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]ENVIDEOUS 7 points8 points9 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]breadfag -2 points-1 points0 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]ENVIDEOUS 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]breadfag -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DignifiedAlpaca 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Icerith 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Nybaz 10 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Septiimus 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ETF_Ross101 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Consilio_et_Animis 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]McDorable 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]breadfag 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]flies_with_owls 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]McDorable 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]iainmf[M] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]breadfag 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]iainmf 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ElectraUnderTheSea 197 points198 points199 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Drone_Better 36 points37 points38 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jasperhaan 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 103 points104 points105 points (31 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheGreatConst 90 points91 points92 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]geniice 9 points10 points11 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheGreatConst 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]geniice 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Azurenightsky 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]geniice 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]breadfag 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Azurenightsky 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]nattdr 26 points27 points28 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Gohorne 8 points9 points10 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]janearcade 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Gohorne 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]janearcade 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HenryCGk 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]HenryCGk 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NecroHexr 16 points17 points18 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]NecroHexr 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheStumblingWolf 9 points10 points11 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]geniice 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Azurenightsky 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]geniice 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]uselubewithcondoms 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Nybaz 13 points14 points15 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]xNOM 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mr_woodles123 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]jonnyhaldane 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]auMatech 146 points147 points148 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]Ctrl_Alt_Abstergo1 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
Uh, it’s England’s central bank... there’s no “leaving” it.
[–]j1ggl 54 points55 points56 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bsapavel 24 points25 points26 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Drone_Better 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Drone_Better 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lion_amongst_gods 42 points43 points44 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]pavlikmmm 28 points29 points30 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]firehydrant_man 19 points20 points21 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]pavlikmmm 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Silencio00 18 points19 points20 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 28 points29 points30 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 10 points11 points12 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]carlsberg24 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]NorskChef 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Crooklar 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]minecraftme123 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 13 points14 points15 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]w_cruice 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BrobdingnagianMember 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 10 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]BrobdingnagianMember 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]agentsika 13 points14 points15 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]kingmayo -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]agentsika 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]weedislif 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Wildwest21 18 points19 points20 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 15 points16 points17 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]MakeGasNotWar 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Khufu2589 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]double-happiness 13 points14 points15 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]double-happiness 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Highground69420 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SharedRegime 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]teureg 6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]accountancyisboring 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Tmomp 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]blueorange22_ 6 points7 points8 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Opinion12345 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SpiritedProgrammer 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RavynArcadia 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]theLeftHatesReality 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]OlofPalmeBurnInHell 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]carlsberg24 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]carlsberg24 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]DignifiedAlpaca 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LSD_FamilyMan 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]PlatinumBeetle 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]civicmon 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]1LegendaryWombat 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]thefudmaster 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Earthican_Male1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
It's okay to be a white male.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ctwise12 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ctwise12 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mallozzin 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]anonymous4u 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]WarOfNoise 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]WarOfNoise 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MrWhiteside97 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ulgulanoth 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mindraker 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]TibortheChechen 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]amakoviney 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SpecialPea 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]gamessuck00 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]gamessuck00 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dunkolunko 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CrazyCBoiiii 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DignifiedAlpaca 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sissy_That_Keyboard 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fogoticus 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TheGriefersCat 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]meggamatty64 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]not_a_fracking_cylon 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TigPlaze 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]dovakin123489 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]El-Autismo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SteamyyBunss 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]B1ue_Guardian 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]nanan00 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]AlistairH94 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]anoamas321 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DignifiedAlpaca 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RoryTate 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MrWhiteside97 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]AhmadZS1 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
Diversity is beneficial, but happening to be a white male is a feature, not a flaw.
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]lethrowaway4me 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]oafsalot -4 points-3 points-2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]oafsalot -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Skydreamer6 -24 points-23 points-22 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 12 points13 points14 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]Skydreamer6 -13 points-12 points-11 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mr_Crick84[S] 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]WolfShaman 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RoryTate 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link