Current Affairs King Charles III

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've got to say I don't think there's anything wrong with asking about someone's family heritage. In fact I've done it many times, I think it's just being interested in getting to know someone.

Of course it would be a bit weird to ask it as soon as you meet the person, usually the conversation develops organically.

However if I met a person with an African name, in African traditional dress I would probably assume they were African and ask based on that. If I make an honest mistake and they tell me they are British then I'd apologise for my mistake and ask about their family heritage because I want to get to know them.

What gets me about the woke is that they must be so perfect in their own lives.

But the thing is these people judge yet often have their own skeletons in their closet - they've had sexual intercourse before marriage, they've no spirituality, they have likely done drugs at one point or another, they cuss, they insult others some even will have had run ins with the law.

So where does this misplaced superiority come from I wonder when judging an 83 year old arl bird based off a one off conversation ?
 
What gets me about the woke is that they must be so perfect in their own lives.

But the thing is these people judge yet often have their own skeletons in their closet - they've had sexual intercourse before marriage, they've no spirituality, they have likely done drugs at one point or another, they cuss, they insult others some even will have had run ins with the law.

So where does this misplaced superiority come from I wonder when judging an 83 year old arl bird based off a one off conversation ?

Well that really wasn't what I was saying at all however I will say that because it is the Royal Family and high profile the employee will likely have been given a very generous severance package and reference and likely have signed a non-disclosure agreement.

Good luck firing someone for that in a regular job, I'd be taking that straight to tribunal. The burden of proof lies to prove guilt, not innocence.
 
Well that really wasn't what I was saying at all however I will say that because it is the Royal Family and high profile the employee will likely have been given a very generous severance package and reference and likely have signed a non-disclosure agreement.

Good luck firing someone for that in a regular job, I'd be taking that straight to tribunal. The burden of proof lies to prove guilt, not innocence.

I agree with what you're saying Diogenes however I guarantee if you was in the same situation you would be judged in the woke court based on little to no evidence other than one person claiming to be offended by your conversation and as a result you lose your job, livelihood and your reputation tarnished forever and some find that acceptable.

I used to think these people were just misguided fools/student types but through the lens of my third eye I see this group as being a real threat to our liberties and freedoms of expression. They're the left wing equivalent of those mad baptist pastors in the US who are fiddling taxes and touching kids whilst judging everything else that moves.
 
I agree with what you're saying Diogenes however I guarantee if you was in the same situation you would be judged in the woke court based on little to no evidence other than one person claiming to be offended by your conversation and as a result you lose your job, livelihood and your reputation tarnished forever and some find that acceptable.

I used to think these people were just misguided fools/student types but through the lens of my third eye I see this group as being a real threat to our liberties and freedoms of expression. They're the left wing equivalent of those mad baptist pastors in the US who are fiddling taxes and touching kids whilst judging everything else that moves.

The problem is it's so subjective based on the feelings of a person, especially with 'micro aggressions' and unconscious bias being taken as factors without adequate evidence on which to base conclusions.

I think sometimes people walk away from a conversation with two different perceptions on how it went. People can offend without malice or intent and this is why if possible people should be open and explain how the other person made them feel. Also context is also important, if you are offended perhaps examine why you felt this way. Maybe it was a pressured situation or you felt out of place, maybe your mood or social matters made you feel more sensitive.

I'm all for getting any and all racism in the bin but smearing anything and everything as racially motivated isn't helpful. If all you've got is a hammer everything looks like a nail. If you are out to take every perceived slight as racist then you will see it as such.
 
What gets me about the woke is that they must be so perfect in their own lives.

But the thing is these people judge yet often have their own skeletons in their closet - they've had sexual intercourse before marriage, they've no spirituality, they have likely done drugs at one point or another, they cuss, they insult others some even will have had run ins with the law.

So where does this misplaced superiority come from I wonder when judging an 83 year old arl bird based off a one off conversation ?
What is this Woke mate ?

& who are "these people" ?
 
Whilst I have little sympathy for the establishment - this woman is a wolf in sheeps clothing who doesn't want unity and peace - she (and the woke) wants white people walking on egg shells and self hating themselves forevermore based on what a bunch of white folk did decades/centuries ago (even though shock horror black folk also enslaved people, have massacred people and have their own racists in their ranks).

The woke have some of the most racist views around which is why the few positive things they stand for doesn't get the support it should in the mainstream.

What's a woke?
 
The problem is it's so subjective based on the feelings of a person, especially with 'micro aggressions' and unconscious bias being taken as factors without adequate evidence on which to base conclusions.

I think sometimes people walk away from a conversation with two different perceptions on how it went. People can offend without malice or intent and this is why if possible people should be open and explain how the other person made them feel. Also context is also important, if you are offended perhaps examine why you felt this way. Maybe it was a pressured situation or you felt out of place, maybe your mood or social matters made you feel more sensitive.

I'm all for getting any and all racism in the bin but smearing anything and everything as racially motivated isn't helpful. If all you've got is a hammer everything looks like a nail. If you are out to take every perceived slight as racist then you will see it as such.

Great post mate and that bold bit is completely true - too many people looking to be offended on other peoples behalf these days.

You're a wise man sir its why I never have doubts about seeking counsel from you in the CA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top