imlikeahermit
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#61
Report 2 weeks ago
#61
(Original post by DSilva)
Yes it does. He says black boys are too feminine and that's a bigger issue than racism.
Since you’ve replied to another poster, but not me, we can all safely assume now that you haven’t read the report you’re taking so much umbrage to.
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#62
Report 2 weeks ago
#62
Name:  Screenshot_2021-04-01-10-16-17-31.jpg
Views: 11
Size:  130.0 KB

Haha 🤣🤣🤣
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#63
Report 2 weeks ago
#63
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
Name:  Screenshot_2021-04-01-10-16-17-31.jpg
Views: 11
Size:  130.0 KB

Haha 🤣🤣🤣
What an absolute clown. Disappointed that the report doesn’t tell the story his party and it’s biased MPs want it to. Don’t let the truth get in the way of a good bit of race baiting.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#64
Report 2 weeks ago
#64
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
Since you’ve replied to another poster, but not me, we can all safely assume now that you haven’t read the report you’re taking so much umbrage to.
I didn't see your response...?
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#65
Report 2 weeks ago
#65
(Original post by DSilva)
I didn't see your response...?
Shocker. But still no indication as to whether you’ve read the report or not, so by default, it’s a no.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#66
Report 2 weeks ago
#66
(Original post by Napp)
Why am i not surprised the usual suspects are on this thread saying that either its outright lying, mistaken or simply twisting the facts them whining about how in actual fact (they seem to mistake their warped opinion for facts) the UK is basically the 3rd Reich trying to wipe out those pesky coloured sorts.

Ridiculous. For a piece of news that actually points out something rather good for a change they still seem able to manufacture some faux grievance to fit their queer narrative.
The political context of a report is highly relevant.

If the Tories commissioned a report on Brexit, and handpicked a bunch of panellists who were very pro Brexit, and the report reached a conclusion that Breixt was fantastic, would you simply accept it without challenge?
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#67
Report 2 weeks ago
#67
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
Because the short findings have said there is no institutional racism. Again, just to be clear, since your the one bleating on, have you read the report? If it’s not a yes on the next reply I’m gonna assume it’s a no.
Ah here's the response.

That's not an answer. All you've done is restated the report's conclusion. You haven't said why you think there are no issues with the report and that conclusion.

Unless you've actually read the report in full (or at least more than the headlines) , and the context around it, how do you know there are no issues with it?

The context of the report is highly relevant. It's a government report for a start, not an independent peer reviewed one. And the panellists were handpicked by the government, many of whom had already decided there was no institutional racism before they even undertook the report https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...inised-fathers

It would be the equivalent of the Tory party commissioning a report into brexit, and choosing panellists who were very pro brexit. Would you just accept the findings of a report without challenge?
Last edited by DSilva; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#68
Report 2 weeks ago
#68
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
Your right - you certainly have to take in the political context here. I mean this isn't an unbiased peer reviewed study, its a report commissioned by a conservative government etc.

I'm still surprised though. The torries don't normally come out so blatantly against the progressive way of thinking. Sure economically they are very (or used to be) hard in their conservative convictions, but socially they have pissed off a whole lot of conservatives by not explicitly taking a conservative/right wing stance. So a report like this, if they stand by it, is quite an interesting thing.

I think that stage I will praise the report for its balance. It certainly isn't the get-out-of-jail card that those on the right want it to be.. it still acknowledges many racial problems. But its not the everything-is-awful report that the left would praise either, as it acknowledges the areas where we do well.

Balanced doesn't equal correct though, and I'm sure people will spend ages going through each point and comparing it to the actual studies/figures/evidence to see how it holds up. There are so many individual areas of something like this, that to be honest I'll wait for a nice big article or video that breaks it all down and looks at which parts are correct and which aren't.
https://mobile.twitter.com/LBC/statu...79970440060932

Worth a watch.
0
reply
Hallouminatus
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#69
Report 2 weeks ago
#69
(Original post by DSilva)
Yes it does. He says black boys are too feminine and that's a bigger issue than racism.
I see you've stopped saying he claimed "racism doesn't exist" , so I guess you have realised that you were wrong about that, but you're persisting with the claim that he said "black boys are too feminine", which is also incorrect. I can only assume that you have been misled by the poorly phrased headline Black boys are too feminised, which is slightly different from your statement, and was probably not written by Sewall anyway. The article itself includes the sentence: "More than racism, I now firmly believe that the main problem holding back black boys academically is their over-feminised upbringing." It's their upbringing that's "feminised", not the boys. He's referring to the relatively high proportion of black Caribbean boys who are brought up by single mothers, and he suggests that this may be a significant factor in lower academic achievement and more frequent involvement in crime. It's not an original idea, and you may well disagree, but you should at least try to engage with the actual arguments rather than the blatant straw man: "racism doesn't exist and black boys are too feminine". Read the whole article for a more nuanced understanding. It's not nearly as long as the report, which you are also so quick to disparage without bothering to read.
1
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#70
Report 2 weeks ago
#70
(Original post by Hallouminatus)
I see you've stopped saying he claimed "racism doesn't exist" , so I guess you have realised that you were wrong about that, but you're persisting with the claim that he said "black boys are too feminine", which is also incorrect. I can only assume that you have been misled by the poorly phrased headline Black boys are too feminised, which is slightly different from your statement, and was probably not written by Sewall anyway. The article itself includes the sentence: "More than racism, I now firmly believe that the main problem holding back black boys academically is their over-feminised upbringing." It's their upbringing that's "feminised", not the boys. He's referring to the relatively high proportion of black Caribbean boys who are brought up by single mothers, and he suggests that this may be a significant factor in lower academic achievement and more frequent involvement in crime. It's not an original idea, and you may well disagree, but you should at least try to engage with the actual arguments rather than the blatant straw man: "racism doesn't exist and black boys are too feminine". Read the whole article for a more nuanced understanding. It's not nearly as long as the report, which you are also so quick to disparage without bothering to read.
I never said he claimed racism doesn't exist.

I said, correctly, that he's long claimed institutional racism doesn't exist, yet for some reason he was seen as a suitable candidate to chair a report on it.
Last edited by DSilva; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
TheMcSame
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#71
Report 2 weeks ago
#71
(Original post by 04MR17)
Do you really believe scientific data is as objective as the findings of a panel of people investigating a metaphysical and socio-cultural phenomenon?
I'm sorry, I thought actual experts knew more about their subjects than armchair layabouts. But please, continue to spout your flavour of conspiracy as if it's not the same as being an anti-vaxxer or a flat earther.

If this were about any other subject, you'd call those who don't believe it idiots and conspiracy theorists. But all of a sudden, because you don't agree with the findings, it's not right.
Last edited by TheMcSame; 2 weeks ago
1
reply
TCA2b
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#72
Report 2 weeks ago
#72
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
Name:  Screenshot_2021-04-01-10-16-17-31.jpg
Views: 11
Size:  130.0 KB

Haha 🤣🤣🤣
Imagine being disappointed about it. Shouldn't he be celebrating? But it doesn't align with their usual schtick so no, of course not.
0
reply
Hallouminatus
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#73
Report 2 weeks ago
#73
(Original post by DSilva)
I never said he claimed racism doesn't exist.
Really? Here's your complete post from yesterday:
(Original post by DSilva)
In 2010, the chair of the Panel wrote this article claiming racism doesn't exist and black boys are too feminine
https://amp.theguardian.com/commenti...mpression=true

Excuse me if I don't take his report seriously.
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#74
Report 2 weeks ago
#74
(Original post by DSilva)
Ah here's the response.

That's not an answer. All you've done is restated the report's conclusion. You haven't said why you think there are no issues with the report and that conclusion.

Unless you've actually read the report in full (or at least more than the headlines) , and the context around it, how do you know there are no issues with it?

The context of the report is highly relevant. It's a government report for a start, not an independent peer reviewed one. And the panellists were handpicked by the government, many of whom had already decided there was no institutional racism before they even undertook the report https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...inised-fathers

It would be the equivalent of the Tory party commissioning a report into brexit, and choosing panellists who were very pro brexit. Would you just accept the findings of a report without challenge?
Lovely story. But what you really are doing in all this blather above is just sidetracking from the fact that you are taking such umbrage to a report you haven’t even read.
0
reply
V℮rsions
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#75
Report 2 weeks ago
#75
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
(He's black by the way.. not that it should matter, but it does to many progressive campaigners. That means you can call him an uncle tom, instead of/and a racist)
Thank you for clarifying this mans skin colour so we can insult him appropriately
It's things like this that make race relations such a mess to begin with.

I agree with the report, the woman in charge of deporting people in the UK is brown and if that's sign of institutional racism then I guess pigs have started flying.
1
reply
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#76
Report 2 weeks ago
#76
(Original post by TheMcSame)
I'm sorry, I thought actual experts knew more about their subjects than armchair layabouts. But please, continue to spout your flavour of conspiracy as if it's not the same as being an anti-vaxxer or a flat earther.

If this were about any other subject, you'd call those who don't believe it idiots and conspiracy theorists. But all of a sudden, because you don't agree with the findings, it's not right.
Where exactly have I mentioned any conspiracy?

At what point have I said I don't agree with the findings?

I asked you a simple question about research methodology which you haven't answered. Instead, you have chosen to deflect and presume I hold opinions that I have not stated.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#77
Report 2 weeks ago
#77
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
Lovely story. But what you really are doing in all this blather above is just sidetracking from the fact that you are taking such umbrage to a report you haven’t even read.
I'm taking umbrage with those who produced it.

You've not read it though. So how can you know there are no issues with it?
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#78
Report 2 weeks ago
#78
(Original post by Hallouminatus)
Really? Here's your complete post from yesterday:
I meant institutional racism.
0
reply
Joleee
Badges: 19
#79
Report 2 weeks ago
#79
i tried to read the report but it's 258 pages and boatloads of text, which is very hard to do when you don't have a laptop

my impression from the BBC article tho is the report doesn't say anything controversial. in fact, it seems like it was very carefully drafted from a skilled politician, including 'not deliberately rigged' - the operative word here being 'deliberately'. personally don't doubt that's true, and if it is at all it's marginal; but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem and the authors of the report don't deny that either. personally suspect the reason members of the BAME community are over twice as likely to be in poverty than white people, more likely to be unemployed, less likely to be in managerial positions, less likely to have a university degree and less likely to go to a top uni is because of the history of institutional discrimination and racism that has led them into systemic poverty.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...ing-in-poverty

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...97066.html?amp

systemic poverty - ie a cycle of poverty - that goes on for decades (or longer i suppose) is very hard to get out of. most people never leave the socioeconomic class they were born in and if you grow up poor you're over three times as likely to be a poor adult.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4108157/

so sure, maybe direct institutional racism has lessened (or non-existent according to the report) but i don't see how Britain is suddenly a role model for other countries till it starts putting in significant effort to alleviate the damage that has caused the systemic poverty in the first place.
Last edited by Joleee; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
epicnm
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#80
Report 2 weeks ago
#80
The problem with this report, and more generally racism in the UK, is the wide scale denial of its existence outside of directly racially abusing a person.

It shows a complete disregard for the interplay of social class and race which often have overlapping discriminations. Kenan Malik makes a very interesting point in his thread - https://twitter.com/kenanmalik/statu...848333312?s=21

The fact that the report states that instead of “decolonising” the curriculum, students should be taught the benefits of slavery, is the exact reason the curriculum needs decolonising. It would be (and rightfully so) atrocious for students to be taught the ‘benefits’ of the Holocaust instead of the anti-semetic prejudice that resulted in the deaths of millions of Jewish victims.

The report ignores data, evidence and the experiences of people of colour who are systematically failed by institutions ranging from education to health to the justice system. Even several of the ‘experts’ listed as a ‘contributor’ to the report have dissociated themselves from the claims being made.



Progress being made to fight institutional racism is now being set back by a report which pretends racism doesn’t exist whilst simultaneously deflecting blame onto black communities for the effects of systemic racism.

Denying cancer exists only results in more people dying from cancer and prevents opportunities to find a cure.
Last edited by epicnm; 2 weeks ago
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What factors affect your mental health the most right now?

Anxiousness about lockdown easing (144)
4.86%
Uncertainty around my education (436)
14.71%
Uncertainty around my future career prospects (333)
11.24%
Lack of purpose or motivation (412)
13.9%
Lack of support system (eg. teachers, counsellors, delays in care) (138)
4.66%
Impact of lockdown on physical health (180)
6.07%
Loneliness (255)
8.61%
Financial worries (109)
3.68%
Concern about myself or my loves ones getting/having been ill (121)
4.08%
Exposure to negative news/social media (135)
4.56%
Lack of real life entertainment (159)
5.37%
Lack of confidence in making big life decisions (261)
8.81%
Worry about missed opportunities during the pandemic (280)
9.45%

Watched Threads

View All