I would certainly feel a lot safer as a UK indian man living in a predominantly indian area, with indian family, shops and religious temples surrounding me than a white hetero male in a mixed community with bugger all to do with my local community besides paying bills to british gas and the council.
I would certainly feel a lot safer as a UK indian man living in a predominantly indian area, with indian family, shops and religious temples surrounding me than a white hetero male in a mixed community with bugger all to do with my local community besides paying bills to british gas and the council.
I would feel safe anywhere. Would you say you are generally a nervous and scared person?
Treating groups this way isn't the way to deal with inequality. If one group is highly privileged, that doesn't mean that the individuals in that group who are short on resources, ill, or regularly mistreated by others in that group if not by others outside of it, are fine.
Every group gets a shitty deal in some areas of life, even white, hetero men like myself. To suggest we are at the bottom of the pile though? That's just stupid.
No, not at all. However you do seem nervous of my opinion. Shall I put it through a PC translator for you so you can sleep better tonight?
Is a PC translator someone employed by the Met Police when dealing with the disproportionate Stop & Search routinely directed at working-class young black males??
Real inequality is socioeconomic. The rich are the ones that get the best educations in expensive private schools and top universities, where they make establishment connections with other rich people and then spend years getting experience by working in unpaid internships.
When you get to that level, superficial differences like race, sexuality and gender, are pretty much nothing.
Every group gets a shitty deal in some areas of life, even white, hetero men like myself. To suggest we are at the bottom of the pile though? That's just stupid.
The 'victim' industry is very protective of its membership. Couple that with the general trend of 'institutionalised' misandry which is so fashionable these days, and I think the response to the O.P.'s question pretty much demonstrates that despite being the new 'original sin', it's unlikely to be understood by those with little capacity for independent thought.
Perhaps when some of the posters above have matured a little, and have shaken off their programming... ;-)
The 'victim' industry is very protective of its membership. Couple that with the general trend of 'institutionalised' misandry which is so fashionable these days, and I think the response to the O.P.'s question pretty much demonstrates that despite being the new 'original sin', it's unlikely to be understood by those with little capacity for independent thought.
Perhaps when some of the posters above have matured a little, and have shaken off their programming... ;-)
The 'victim' industry is very protective of its membership. Couple that with the general trend of 'institutionalised' misandry which is so fashionable these days, and I think the response to the O.P.'s question pretty much demonstrates that despite being the new 'original sin', it's unlikely to be understood by those with little capacity for independent thought.
Perhaps when some of the posters above have matured a little, and have shaken off their programming... ;-)
Lets get rid of the 'programming' the Patriarchy has inflicted on you first
Real inequality is socioeconomic. The rich are the ones that get the best educations in expensive private schools and top universities, where they make establishment connections with other rich people and then spend years getting experience by working in unpaid internships.
When you get to that level, superficial differences like race, sexuality and gender, are pretty much nothing.
This is the truth. Everything else is a distraction that can only benefit those who 'have' as the 'have nots' turn on each other.
Everyone experiences personal inequality and victimisation at least once in their life and as the WHM represents a majority then of course they are going to think they are the most hard done by.
Everyone experiences personal inequality and victimisation at least once in their life and as the WHM represents a majority then of course they are going to think they are the most hard done by.
Web Host Managers?? Despicable bunch! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I would certainly feel a lot safer as a UK indian man living in a predominantly indian area, with indian family, shops and religious temples surrounding me than a white hetero male in a mixed community with bugger all to do with my local community besides paying bills to british gas and the council.
However often I read this post I can't make any sense of it. I see that UK Indian men might like to live near Indian shops and temples/ gurwaras, but what is the 'bugger all to do with your local community' that you suffer from? There are, for example, no places in Britain that do not have churches. Or pubs. Or shops. I live near Southall, which has one of the biggest concentrations of UK INdian people in the UK, and it has churches, golf clubs, a wide range of ordinary UK shops, parks, cricket teams....I can't really see that white, heterosexual men have anything to complain about. It is not like being the only Indian origin person in a Welsh village, is it? And even if it was, almost every tv channel, radio station, newspaper etc is awash with white men; so at least white men can feel part of the mainstream.
Look up the educational performance of white males from poor backgrounds.
How is that a result of unequal treatment though - is someone saying that WHM should not get as good an education as other groups?
Its important, if you want to solve a problem (such as boys performing less well in school for example) to understand the causes of it. Does it only affect straight white boys? Is it an artifact of poverty? Are lessons not being designed to meet the needs of different groups? Is any of this deliberate, based on prejudice?
I am more than happy to go to the barricades to oppose inequality for any group in society, but I really want to understand if it is real and what is driving it.
You need petitions. 2015 goals. Let's aim to get at least A FEW white heterosexual men into the House of Lords, the House of Commons, and onto a few company boards this coming year. Let's see more men stuck in single parent poverty traps. EQUALITY FOR THE MENZZZZ!
Comments
I would certainly feel a lot safer as a UK indian man living in a predominantly indian area, with indian family, shops and religious temples surrounding me than a white hetero male in a mixed community with bugger all to do with my local community besides paying bills to british gas and the council.
I would feel safe anywhere. Would you say you are generally a nervous and scared person?
Is a PC translator someone employed by the Met Police when dealing with the disproportionate Stop & Search routinely directed at working-class young black males??
When you get to that level, superficial differences like race, sexuality and gender, are pretty much nothing.
And as for sexuality, heterosexual men don't have to worry about their safety because of their preference, heterosexuality is the norm.
I agree. We all do to some extent.
Perhaps when some of the posters above have matured a little, and have shaken off their programming... ;-)
Good answer. I assume that's why response.
Super post.
Lets get rid of the 'programming' the Patriarchy has inflicted on you first
This is the truth. Everything else is a distraction that can only benefit those who 'have' as the 'have nots' turn on each other.
Web Host Managers?? Despicable bunch!
Should go back to their own country!
However often I read this post I can't make any sense of it. I see that UK Indian men might like to live near Indian shops and temples/ gurwaras, but what is the 'bugger all to do with your local community' that you suffer from? There are, for example, no places in Britain that do not have churches. Or pubs. Or shops. I live near Southall, which has one of the biggest concentrations of UK INdian people in the UK, and it has churches, golf clubs, a wide range of ordinary UK shops, parks, cricket teams....I can't really see that white, heterosexual men have anything to complain about. It is not like being the only Indian origin person in a Welsh village, is it? And even if it was, almost every tv channel, radio station, newspaper etc is awash with white men; so at least white men can feel part of the mainstream.
Look up the educational performance of white males from poor backgrounds.
How is that a result of unequal treatment though - is someone saying that WHM should not get as good an education as other groups?
Its important, if you want to solve a problem (such as boys performing less well in school for example) to understand the causes of it. Does it only affect straight white boys? Is it an artifact of poverty? Are lessons not being designed to meet the needs of different groups? Is any of this deliberate, based on prejudice?
I am more than happy to go to the barricades to oppose inequality for any group in society, but I really want to understand if it is real and what is driving it.