Wakefield Trinity

I would have thought it would have been an individuals right to decide and not something that should be forced upon them.

 

I don't get it, why would anyone? if its a good job that you want, go for it and may the best whatever win!

 

no, the illogicality is in you response - in numerous posts on this site you repeatedly use the term 'racist' when there is nothing racist in many posts.
It suggests a lack of understanding of what someone is saying and it's a term used when someone like yourself can't really make a cogent argument.
To address your post - firstly when anyone applies for a job they have no idea who else is applying - so none of the applicants can be described as racist.
Secondly you've misread my post - the point I made was that many clubs who 'take the knee' have very few BAME supporters.
Of course all white organisations can support BLM - did you not read my post correctly?

Some will think 'taking the knee' to show support is taking things far enough others may think that practical steps should be taken for instance in the field of employment or leisure.

There are many different opinions on this site on a wide variety of subjects - surprisingly very very few racist comments. I'd request you stop shouting 'racism' when someone expresses a view different to yours.

 

Why did you ask if people would turn down a job interview if a bame person also wanted the job?

And I call for example Selby red racist as he is.

 

The reaction to this on social media has been classic.

Millwall fans now supporting Wakefield because they "only kneel to the Queen".

"Well done Wakefield, **** Black Lives Matter"

In fact I've got bored reading through the racism. Just search Wakefield Trinity on Twitter. The racists have been itching for something like this to happen- they've been very quiet for few weeks.

It's sad to see.

 

I

I dont think the colour of anyones skin should give them an advantage regarding employment , should be based purely on ability, experience, qualification or who came across better in the interview, I also detest the " we have to employ certain minorities" why ? Nobody is stopping anybody applying for a job, you can't make people apply or be interested in certain jobs/ careers, rather than blame employers whilst showing them there demograph break down, try and findout why many people from different colour/ race / religion dont want to be policeman/ firefighters/ Road workers/ scaffolders etc etc etc, you start employing people based on anything but ability/ experience/ qualification then it will have a detrimental effect on the success of a business, the safety of staff and so on.

 

All in spite of the fact that the colour of some people's skin has always given them an advantage when applying for a job. But don't let that irony spoil your argument.

 

I have mixed feelings about positive discrimination but, on balance, go along with it until discrepancies have been erased.
It's an indisputable fact that people of colour have, for many decades, been discriminated against in their applications for employment. I've seen it done.

 

You are correct. It SHOULD be.

But it isn't.

 

That isn't an irony. He's saying that skin colour shouldnt give someone an advantage.
Irony is when someone says it's wrong that white people have historically had an advantage in job applications (it IS wrong) and then calling for black people to now get the advantage instead equality is treating people as equal. Treating one race or skin colour as superior is by definition not equality regardless of which way that goes. Although I do understand the logic behind positive discrimination and the good intentions of it I just don't think it's the correct way to create equality. The only way to have equality is to treat people equal

 

C R I believe that and I agree with you, its wrong, my point is nobody should be discriminated against, like I said best person for the job regardless of colour, but when people are employed based on religion or colour because they have been told too, cant that also be classed as discrimination ?

 

So are we going to get to the point where a minutes silence for someones death isn't respected?

Seeing as there are many people suggesting this is a personal choice of whether to take the knee in respect of a black male who was murdered?

 

The irony is that he's suggesting that skin colour should have no bearing while conveniently ignoring the fact that it always has.

 

I don't think 'taking a knee' is really anything to do with George floyd.

 

I find it as incredulous that everyone wanted to stand, as I did that everyone wanted to take the knee.

 

Yes it can and, as I said, I'm not comfortable with it. Same ad with female MPs or MPs of colour. However, when it's temporary and the only way of redressing the balance then I'm happy to go along with it.

 

You're right that it did start prior, but it has also gained greater symbolism because of the action of a police officer murdering George Floyd in such a manner.

 

It's weird how there's a substantial overlap between people who consider it a personal choice not to kneel but start frothing at the mouth when James McClean doesn't wear a poppy...

 

It's probably changed now but if we were after someone in a junior role, the company would whittle down the applicants by chucking all the over 30s applications and anyone with a PhD in the bin on the grounds that they'd only be there till they got a better job. Colour or religion never came into it but discrimination all the same.