Split - BLM and Sex Preferences thread

Hershey

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
43
Reaction score
67
So just for the sake of honesty lads, I'm pro BLM, mixed ethnicity, pro tearing down statues of slavers and colonialists (and putting them in museums so they can be discussed as historical artefacts, rather than standing venerated in public places), pro trans rights, pro equality for LGBTQ people, consider myself a feminist, well up for a scrap and being good mates afterwards! Personally, I have studied our history and seen the effect of our empire on other nations and I think we can do better than (mostly) stealing other people's *text deleted* and selling them weapons - I don't think the story is over for Great Britain, but I think to be truly Great we must learn from the past. Not offended by your views at all, just have different ones and am happy to discuss. I've spent most of my adult life being a pretty right-wing christian conservative but my views have changed over time - we're all on a journey.
 

thirdtry

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Posts
488
Reaction score
689
So just for the sake of honesty lads, I'm pro BLM, mixed ethnicity, pro tearing down statues of slavers and colonialists (and putting them in museums so they can be discussed as historical artefacts, rather than standing venerated in public places), pro trans rights, pro equality for LGBTQ people, consider myself a feminist, well up for a scrap and being good mates afterwards! Personally, I have studied our history and seen the effect of our empire on other nations and I think we can do better than (mostly) stealing other people's *text deleted* and selling them weapons - I don't think the story is over for Great Britain, but I think to be truly Great we must learn from the past. Not offended by your views at all, just have different ones and am happy to discuss. I've spent most of my adult life being a pretty right-wing christian conservative but my views have changed over time - we're all on a journey.

Not going to get bogged down too much in all this because I generally try to avoid online dispute over lots of these things, nobody really wins.

But a relevant one on the subject of the Empire and some of your points ref. Statues etc, considering the organisation we are joining. You realise that 4 of the 10 VCs were earned in conflicts related to the aims of the Empire and another 5 in a conflict pretty well connected to Imperial goals? Most of the Corps battle honours are also battles fought to expand the empire.

Likewise, half the statues that were pulled down, attacked etc by the anarchists last summer, are of people whose history built the Royal Navy and whose names still apply to most RN bases, training establishments etc.
 

Hershey

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
43
Reaction score
67
Not going to get bogged down too much in all this because I generally try to avoid online dispute over lots of these things, nobody really wins.

But a relevant one on the subject of the Empire and some of your points ref. Statues etc, considering the organisation we are joining. You realise that 4 of the 10 VCs were earned in conflicts related to the aims of the Empire and another 5 in a conflict pretty well connected to Imperial goals? Most of the Corps battle honours are also battles fought to expand the empire.

Likewise, half the statues that were pulled down, attacked etc by the anarchists last summer, are of people whose history built the Royal Navy and whose names still apply to most RN bases, training establishments etc.
There's no need for it to become a dispute as such, none of it is personal, just an interesting topic to discuss.

I would actually go as far as to say that all of those 10 VCs were earned in wars that fit within the historical context of Britain's colonial history, but that doesn't change the individual courage displayed by those in question, or the fact that most acts of heroism on the battlefield are enacted by people who are fighting for friends that they dearly love. However, it brings up a more interesting question about how we view heroes and heroism - do we value courage purely based on an act of valour (i.e. the valuing of courage in and of itself, without considering the cause to which it is applied or the context within which it is enacted) or do we value a courageous act based on its ultimate purpose (i.e. that courage must be applied along with moral imperative). In the former, we can all agree that there were incredibly courageous, determined Nazis who displayed immense fortitude in the face of their enemy, but ultimately they were fighting for a genocidal cause. In the latter, the drawback is that every situation we come across in life is more complex than we think - arguably none moreso than armed conflict.

These are all themes I'm chewing over as my application continues - I'm nowhere near "sorted" on any of it, but it's interesting to discuss!
 

Jaykay2343

Royal Marines Commando
Joined
Feb 9, 2016
Posts
591
Reaction score
778
I'm all up for putting points across in debates and protests, and will at the very least give that person/subject my time.

But as soon as buildings, people, statues, business' start getting targeted and vandalised/damaged...I'm sorry , but I will not waste my time.

I am anti BLM and LGBT because of the narrative it pushes that if you don't support them then you get labelled as racist and homophobic,maybe this is part of the media's fault on showing you news that only they want to show.

I don't judge people on what skin colour they have or there sexual preferences and I am by far, no way prejudice. I judge them on whether they are a dic£head or not.
 

Chelonian

Moderator
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Posts
11,837
Reaction score
14,927
I don't think the story is over for Great Britain, but I think to be truly Great we must learn from the past.
The 'Great' in Great Britain has historically been acknowledged as a means of distinguishing the biggest geographical part of the nation (currently comprised of England, Wales and Scotland) from the United Kingdom, British Isles and previously the British Empire.

For context, think Greater London and Greater Manchester. There is no evidence to suggest that the 'Great' was intended as a superlative adjective.
 

ThreadpigeonsAlpha

Royal Marines Commando
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Posts
5,301
Reaction score
8,274
So just for the sake of honesty lads, I'm pro BLM, mixed ethnicity, pro tearing down statues of slavers and colonialists (and putting them in museums so they can be discussed as historical artefacts, rather than standing venerated in public places), pro trans rights, pro equality for LGBTQ people, consider myself a feminist, well up for a scrap and being good mates afterwards! Personally, I have studied our history and seen the effect of our empire on other nations and I think we can do better than (mostly) stealing other people's *text deleted* and selling them weapons - I don't think the story is over for Great Britain, but I think to be truly Great we must learn from the past. Not offended by your views at all, just have different ones and am happy to discuss. I've spent most of my adult life being a pretty right-wing christian conservative but my views have changed over time - we're all on a journey.
Your post is full of a lot of different issues. The problem with left leaning people is you lump it into one group like it will solve everything.

The irony is, we know the past. You think you can preach about it from holding a false narrative or from reading some select bias reports?
You believe in trying to censor history to fit your narrative? That’s pretty ignorant.

You realise that history is filled with violence, death, pillaging. There were more empires than the British one. You cannot judge people from the past on modern morals. It was a different time, different era and different mindset.

The Royal Navy was pivotal in tackling the slave trade.
The infrastructure and after effects of colonialism is still in place today, which has played a part in modernising and being self sufficient countries. I’ve been to countries from the old British and French Empire and worked with them, members of their forces, proud, good, hard working people who were more than happy to accommodate us and work with us.
The irony is, they are proud of their history and when people like you who have never been there take offence for them it’s laughable.

There was a slave trade in Africa long before Europeans arrived on their shores.
The Arabs had a lucrative White slave trade and still have a continuing slave problem.
The Romans had a thriving slave trade.
The Vikings raped pillaged and enslaved.
Persian Empire.
Greeks.
The list is quite long, almost endless. Humans are tribal, we live and protect our little tribes and communities, if we didn’t like a fellow tribe, or they had something we needed, we fought for it. we have done since caveman times.

Communism is government backed slavery. Yet a lot of the left seem to love it for some strange reason. Millions died under that ideology.

As for BLM. You will find that 98% of people were horrified about the death of George Floyd. Obviously there’s going to be some tapped people who, just like there are black extremists, there are white extremists.
What the media forgets to report is the fact that several of the officers were minorities.
BLM uses violence and intimidation to push false narratives and acts like a domestic terrorist group that actively burns down, destroys, and hurts black communities. It fuels the fire of segregation, and increases racial tension.
Funny how the media doesn’t report when black communities and people speak against BLM, because it doesn’t feed the narrative.

The media wants to segregate and control. They divide and conquer. You polarise the people, force them to their echo chambers, force them to self sequester in their false narratives. Because it takes away your ability to think for yourself.

I’d be happy to discuss why 3rd wave feminism is a joke and isn’t true equality.
I also have a big interest in transgenderism and the physiological and psychological effects too, if you would want to discuss that aswell?

2 questions I will ask, just so this isn’t purely about race, is that there a section of the LBGTI+ community want to normalise adults being sexually attracted to children, do you support this view, i
And if there is more than 2 genders, how can someone be “Bisexual”?

Id be more than happy to engage in a civil discussion.
 

ThreadpigeonsAlpha

Royal Marines Commando
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Posts
5,301
Reaction score
8,274
Genghis Khan raped and pillaged so much of the world that he had an environmental impact, and there are 16 million male descendants today because of him.
He wasn’t exactly white....
 

Hershey

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
43
Reaction score
67
I'm all up for putting points across in debates and protests, and will at the very least give that person/subject my time.

But as soon as buildings, people, statues, business' start getting targeted and vandalised/damaged...I'm sorry , but I will not waste my time.

I am anti BLM and LGBT because of the narrative it pushes that if you don't support them then you get labelled as racist and homophobic,maybe this is part of the media's fault on showing you news that only they want to show.

I don't judge people on what skin colour they have or there sexual preferences and I am by far, no way prejudice. I judge them on whether they are a dic£head or not.
Again, really interesting to discuss and as someone who comes from a different perspective, I don't want your views to be silenced at all, I just want them to be robustly debated. Also, apologies for the length of response, I think this subject is worth a proper chinwag.

I think changes to society seem to come through a combination of cultural change (the collection of ideas, beliefs, perceptions, choices and a mass or community of individuals has) and systemic change (policies, legislation, administration change etc.).

Protest is part of this picture, and is balanced by laws against hate speech, criminal damage, assault, affray, public order etc. However, I found that when I looked honestly at protest movements in the past I saw a bit of a pattern emerge:
  • When Colin Kapaernick was peacefully kneeling...
  • When the suffragette movement...
  • When MLK peacefully protested...
  • When Gandhi peacefully protested...
  • When the Occupy Movement peacefully protested...
  • When Extinction Rebellion peacefully protested...
In short, the status quo doesn't respond to peaceful protest, it responds to violence because it understands violence.

Furthermore, the harm of the system needs to be balanced against the harm of protest.

If you agree that

To be honest I don't get the cancel culture either, and it's not representative of the academic consensus. One of the reasons why I was able to look at my own views so honestly and change them was because of a dude named Ibram X Kendi, who I recommend reading if you're curious about these views and want to honestly explore the other perspective. Ibram X Kendi is a proponent of anti-racism
Your post is full of a lot of different issues. The problem with left leaning people is you lump it into one group like it will solve everything.

The irony is, we know the past. You think you can preach about it from holding a false narrative or from reading some select bias reports?
You believe in trying to censor history to fit your narrative? That’s pretty ignorant.

You realise that history is filled with violence, death, pillaging. There were more empires than the British one. You cannot judge people from the past on modern morals. It was a different time, different era and different mindset.

The Royal Navy was pivotal in tackling the slave trade.
The infrastructure and after effects of colonialism is still in place today, which has played a part in modernising and being self sufficient countries. I’ve been to countries from the old British and French Empire and worked with them, members of their forces, proud, good, hard working people who were more than happy to accommodate us and work with us.
The irony is, they are proud of their history and when people like you who have never been there take offence for them it’s laughable.

There was a slave trade in Africa long before Europeans arrived on their shores.
The Arabs had a lucrative White slave trade and still have a continuing slave problem.
The Romans had a thriving slave trade.
The Vikings raped pillaged and enslaved.
Persian Empire.
Greeks.
The list is quite long, almost endless. Humans are tribal, we live and protect our little tribes and communities, if we didn’t like a fellow tribe, or they had something we needed, we fought for it. we have done since caveman times.

Communism is government backed slavery. Yet a lot of the left seem to love it for some strange reason. Millions died under that ideology.

As for BLM. You will find that 98% of people were horrified about the death of George Floyd. Obviously there’s going to be some tapped people who, just like there are black extremists, there are white extremists.
What the media forgets to report is the fact that several of the officers were minorities.
BLM uses violence and intimidation to push false narratives and acts like a domestic terrorist group that actively burns down, destroys, and hurts black communities. It fuels the fire of segregation, and increases racial tension.
Funny how the media doesn’t report when black communities and people speak against BLM, because it doesn’t feed the narrative.

The media wants to segregate and control. They divide and conquer. You polarise the people, force them to their echo chambers, force them to self sequester in their false narratives. Because it takes away your ability to think for yourself.

I’d be happy to discuss why 3rd wave feminism is a joke and isn’t true equality.
I also have a big interest in transgenderism and the physiological and psychological effects too, if you would want to discuss that aswell?

2 questions I will ask, just so this isn’t purely about race, is that there a section of the LBGTI+ community want to normalise adults being sexually attracted to children, do you support this view, i
And if there is more than 2 genders, how can someone be “Bisexual”?

Id be more than happy to engage in a civil discussion.
Yeah mate - well up for a civil discussion. Shall we start another thread or stay on here? You've covered quite a lot of different topics in yours that probably deserve specific attention so it might worth picking one thing, going with that for a while rather than jumbling it all together. Looking forward to it mate!
 

Hershey

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
43
Reaction score
67
Again, really interesting to discuss and as someone who comes from a different perspective, I don't want your views to be silenced at all, I just want them to be robustly debated. Also, apologies for the length of response, I think this subject is worth a proper chinwag.

I think changes to society seem to come through a combination of cultural change (the collection of ideas, beliefs, perceptions, choices and a mass or community of individuals has) and systemic change (policies, legislation, administration change etc.).

Protest is part of this picture, and is balanced by laws against hate speech, criminal damage, assault, affray, public order etc. However, I found that when I looked honestly at protest movements in the past I saw a bit of a pattern emerge:
  • When Colin Kapaernick was peacefully kneeling...
  • When the suffragette movement...
  • When MLK peacefully protested...
  • When Gandhi peacefully protested...
  • When the Occupy Movement peacefully protested...
  • When Extinction Rebellion peacefully protested...
In short, the status quo doesn't respond to peaceful protest, it responds to violence because it understands violence.

Furthermore, the harm of the system needs to be balanced against the harm of protest.

If you agree that

To be honest I don't get the cancel culture either, and it's not representative of the academic consensus. One of the reasons why I was able to look at my own views so honestly and change them was because of a dude named Ibram X Kendi, who I recommend reading if you're curious about these views and want to honestly explore the other perspective. Ibram X Kendi is a proponent of anti-racism

Yeah mate - well up for a civil discussion. Shall we start another thread or stay on here? You've covered quite a lot of different topics in yours that probably deserve specific attention so it might worth picking one thing, going with that for a while rather than jumbling it all together. Looking forward to it mate!
Ah woops, this has been added onto a draft... my bad!
 

ThreadpigeonsAlpha

Royal Marines Commando
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Posts
5,301
Reaction score
8,274
Again, really interesting to discuss and as someone who comes from a different perspective, I don't want your views to be silenced at all, I just want them to be robustly debated. Also, apologies for the length of response, I think this subject is worth a proper chinwag.

I think changes to society seem to come through a combination of cultural change (the collection of ideas, beliefs, perceptions, choices and a mass or community of individuals has) and systemic change (policies, legislation, administration change etc.).

Protest is part of this picture, and is balanced by laws against hate speech, criminal damage, assault, affray, public order etc. However, I found that when I looked honestly at protest movements in the past I saw a bit of a pattern emerge:
  • When Colin Kapaernick was peacefully kneeling...
  • When the suffragette movement...
  • When MLK peacefully protested...
  • When Gandhi peacefully protested...
  • When the Occupy Movement peacefully protested...
  • When Extinction Rebellion peacefully protested...
In short, the status quo doesn't respond to peaceful protest, it responds to violence because it understands violence.

Furthermore, the harm of the system needs to be balanced against the harm of protest.

If you agree that

To be honest I don't get the cancel culture either, and it's not representative of the academic consensus. One of the reasons why I was able to look at my own views so honestly and change them was because of a dude named Ibram X Kendi, who I recommend reading if you're curious about these views and want to honestly explore the other perspective. Ibram X Kendi is a proponent of anti-racism

Yeah mate - well up for a civil discussion. Shall we start another thread or stay on here? You've covered quite a lot of different topics in yours that probably deserve specific attention so it might worth picking one thing, going with that for a while rather than jumbling it all together. Looking forward to it mate!
Good post, let me get through that.
 

ThreadpigeonsAlpha

Royal Marines Commando
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Posts
5,301
Reaction score
8,274
Again, really interesting to discuss and as someone who comes from a different perspective, I don't want your views to be silenced at all, I just want them to be robustly debated. Also, apologies for the length of response, I think this subject is worth a proper chinwag.

This is definitely a good attitude to have and I completely agree with you. It’s just a shame the left don’t share that view.
I think changes to society seem to come through a combination of cultural change (the collection of ideas, beliefs, perceptions, choices and a mass or community of individuals has) and systemic change (policies, legislation, administration change etc.).
Exactly. And through those changes in attitudes, various things have happened through history. For example the Royal Navy was pivotal in stopping the slave trade. Engaging in war and setting the trend when other countries didn’t agree with it. The Royal Navy helped to pave the way and abolish the Slave trade.

Now let’s not forget the majority of sailors on the ships weren’t high class status men, they were poor, it was a hard graft, impressed or pressganged into service.
Protest is part of this picture, and is balanced by laws against hate speech, criminal damage, assault, affray, public order etc. However, I found that when I looked honestly at protest movements in the past I saw a bit of a pattern emerge:

Protest, organised peaceful protest? Yes. Violent riots that burned down black communities, destroyed black owned businesses and turned violence against anyone who wouldn’t bow to knee. The media didn’t help with misreporting and poor journalism.
  • When Colin Kapaernick was peacefully kneeling...
  • When the suffragette movement...
  • When MLK peacefully protested...
  • When Gandhi peacefully protested...
  • When the Occupy Movement peacefully protested...
  • When Extinction Rebellion peacefully protested...
Colin Kaepernick was an average NFL player. He was also rumoured to being booted off the team and there’s speculation that he did it to ensure that he couldn’t be sacked. Because it would look bad in the press.
The irony lost on everyone is that he was in a position of privilege, he was worth around $20 million. He is also in a sport that was majority black, a 68% majority.

The suffragette movement came at a time when women really did suffer injustice and inequality. Because of old and different mindsets.
Emily Davison was a known extremist who was kicked out of several University groups for extremist views. She also had a return train ticket in her pocket when she was killed, and it’s speculated that she never meant to kill herself at all.
Women don’t face those injustices anymore, and the gender pay gap is a proven myth.

Martin Luther King would turn in his grave at this generations actions. He said “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
The constant call for segregation and increase in racial tensions and false narratives. There’s even left wing students in the US who are calling for segregation again.

Ghandi really did utilities peaceful protesting because he knew the effects and responses to violent attacks, intimidation and the fall out from it.

Occupy movement was a failure, it was communist protest in disguise and there was violence and people faced backlash.

Extinction rebellion doesn’t peacefully protest, they hamper people’s lives, they scaremonger and hold up other people’s lives with stunts, the irony being the after effects of holding up traffic or using products from the hydrocarbon and oil industries to protest is lost on them. They are a bunch of havering idiots. A lot of people don’t support them and are fed up with them and their stupid stunts. Pushing them from their causing.

The takeaway from all this is violence isn’t a sole answer. People don’t respond well threats of violence. Take antifa for example, they use masks and violence to silence people who hold different views? That is fascism.


In short, the status quo doesn't respond to peaceful protest, it responds to violence because it understands violence.

Furthermore, the harm of the system needs to be balanced against the harm of protest.
But BLM aren’t harming the system. They are harming their own communities. People don’t respond well to violence and threats.
You want people to listen? You make well balance arguments and go through the channels.
Otherwise people switch off and just dismiss it, especially when they go out and find their own facts.
Especially when normal people are locked down and suddenly see massive groups of people proteeting

For example, let’s take death in police custody as that’s what started this debate.
In the UK 2019/2020, 18 people died in police custody. Now I agree that we should be striving for 0 deaths. But this is real life. There’s any various reasons why it might happen, and maybe the police need to update their procedures.

But let’s break that number down.
  • Of the 18 deaths in or following police custody, 14 people were White, three were Black and the ethnicity of one person was unknown.
  • 11 of the 18 people were identified as having ‘mental health concerns’ and 14 were known to have a link to alcohol/or drugs. Two people were detained under the Mental Health Act.
  • Eight of the 18 people who died in or following police custody had force used against them either by officers or members of the public before their deaths. Of the people who were physically restrained, six were White and two were Black.
That is from independent review. But the way the left see it, is that it’s open season on ethnicities.
Now there is 107 deaths from police contact. These are listed as:
  • Six people were under 18.
  • 89 people were White, six were Black, seven were Asian and one person was from an ‘Other ethnic group’. The ethnicity was ‘unknown’ for four people.
  • Nine had force used against them, of which seven people were White, one was Black and the ethnicity of one person was ‘unknown’.
  • Half of those who died (54) were reported to be intoxicated by drugs and/or alcohol at the time of the incident or had known issues in this area.


If you agree that

To be honest I don't get the cancel culture either, and it's not representative of the academic consensus. One of the reasons why I was able to look at my own views so honestly and change them was because of a dude named Ibram X Kendi, who I recommend reading if you're curious about these views and want to honestly explore the other perspective. Ibram X Kendi is a proponent of anti-racism

I came across Ibram X Kendi years ago and didn’t think much of him apart from he was part of the mental gymnastics and making up his own definitions to terms.
I also came across a number of black people who disagreed with him. Some even compared him to a cult leader.

Yeah mate - well up for a civil discussion. Shall we start another thread or stay on here? You've covered quite a lot of different topics in yours that probably deserve specific attention so it might worth picking one thing, going with that for a while rather than jumbling it all together. Looking forward to it mate!

This is why I have a problem with the left, because there’s no 1 solution to this and other issues.
It needs free thought, free speech and acceptance of ideas and thoughts.

You obviously have one side of the spectrum, I hold the other. The most likely solution is somewhere in between.
 

Biggles

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Nov 7, 2019
Posts
168
Reaction score
220
3
Your post is full of a lot of different issues. The problem with left leaning people is you lump it into one group like it will solve everything.

The irony is, we know the past. You think you can preach about it from holding a false narrative or from reading some select bias reports?
You believe in trying to censor history to fit your narrative? That’s pretty ignorant.

You realise that history is filled with violence, death, pillaging. There were more empires than the British one. You cannot judge people from the past on modern morals. It was a different time, different era and different mindset.

The Royal Navy was pivotal in tackling the slave trade.
The infrastructure and after effects of colonialism is still in place today, which has played a part in modernising and being self sufficient countries. I’ve been to countries from the old British and French Empire and worked with them, members of their forces, proud, good, hard working people who were more than happy to accommodate us and work with us.
The irony is, they are proud of their history and when people like you who have never been there take offence for them it’s laughable.

There was a slave trade in Africa long before Europeans arrived on their shores.
The Arabs had a lucrative White slave trade and still have a continuing slave problem.
The Romans had a thriving slave trade.
The Vikings raped pillaged and enslaved.
Persian Empire.
Greeks.
The list is quite long, almost endless. Humans are tribal, we live and protect our little tribes and communities, if we didn’t like a fellow tribe, or they had something we needed, we fought for it. we have done since caveman times.

Communism is government backed slavery. Yet a lot of the left seem to love it for some strange reason. Millions died under that ideology.

As for BLM. You will find that 98% of people were horrified about the death of George Floyd. Obviously there’s going to be some tapped people who, just like there are black extremists, there are white extremists.
What the media forgets to report is the fact that several of the officers were minorities.
BLM uses violence and intimidation to push false narratives and acts like a domestic terrorist group that actively burns down, destroys, and hurts black communities. It fuels the fire of segregation, and increases racial tension.
Funny how the media doesn’t report when black communities and people speak against BLM, because it doesn’t feed the narrative.

The media wants to segregate and control. They divide and conquer. You polarise the people, force them to their echo chambers, force them to self sequester in their false narratives. Because it takes away your ability to think for yourself.

I’d be happy to discuss why 3rd wave feminism is a joke and isn’t true equality.
I also have a big interest in transgenderism and the physiological and psychological effects too, if you would want to discuss that aswell?

2 questions I will ask, just so this isn’t purely about race, is that there a section of the LBGTI+ community want to normalise adults being sexually attracted to children, do you support this view, i
And if there is more than 2 genders, how can someone be “Bisexual”?

Id be more than happy to engage in a civil discussion.
3rd wave feminism is an extremist hate movement towards men. There is no push for equality in 3rd wave feminism, it's an out and out war on masculinity and men.
 

Hershey

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
43
Reaction score
67
It’s just a shame the left don’t share that view.
A lot of us actually do, unfortunately the narrative has been hijacked a wee bit. It's a pleasure to discuss with you mate, and I mean that honestly. Thanks for taking the time to write what you've written, as it is really helpful to iron this stuff our a bit before I join as I'm conscious that most people in the RM won't share my views. I'd rather be as honest about my opinions as everyone else is than not be genuine about them. Furthermore, I've actually been exploring these ideas because I think it's important to know what your personal values are - Bertie Kerr once said "Leadership is values-driven behaviour that inspires others to perform." You can't be values-driven without knowing your values - I just want to get to a place of integrity on this stuff and I'm very clear that I don't have it all worked out!

Exactly. And through those changes in attitudes, various things have happened through history. For example the Royal Navy was pivotal in stopping the slave trade. Engaging in war and setting the trend when other countries didn’t agree with it. The Royal Navy helped to pave the way and abolish the Slave trade.
Couldn't agree more - I'm saddened that we partook in the transatlantic slave trade at all but very conscious of the fact that once we abolished it, we threw ourselves behind abolition. Does that mean the Empire was suddenly perfect? No, not at all. There are huge parts of our colonial history that I think are completely awful, and as much as we can say that "it was a different time" there were people back then who stood against it and called for reform because of their conscience. That's how the abolitionists began - Olaudah Equiano, John Newton, William Wilberforce et al were those people who were a counter-cultural voice. At the start of their 18-year campaign Wilberforce and his friends were standing against the majority of public opinion. Much of that didn't change until the sinking of the Zong. My point in saying that is this - we need to consider whether or not in our time there are injustices that need to be addressed and make values-based decisions on how robustly we address them. Personally, I'm proud to say "Black Lives Matter" because I still see the effects of institutional racism in our country - the most recent examples are found in the Home Office's treatment of Caribbean people throughout the Windrush scandal. Many cases point toward a systemic exclusion of Caribbean people from UK citizenship, these are people whose families came and helped rebuild our society after World War II after having fought for us. In my work, I regularly interact with the Home Office in regard to some of my homeless clients and although I can't give any examples due to confidentiality I do find that this system needs to be addressed. Funnily enough, I also find that there is a lot of discrimination towards Eastern European people which needs to addressed just as much as any other form of racism - but it's fascinating to note that racism isn't as simple as "black" and "white".

However, back to the Transatlantic Slave Trade. I think that our reflection on our history needs to be more complex, especially in terms of how we teach it in schools - this stuff still creeps up today. One of the things I find inconsistent about the narrative regarding statues was the fact that we have so many statues erected to people who made fortunes and secured themselves lasting positions of influence and power through an unimaginably cruel enterprise - and yet we have no public monuments to the men, women and children who were themselves enslaved. Arguably it was the people who were enslaved who built this nation by their labour and their suffering - where are the statues to them? There is not even one. In fact, on the Buxton Fountain in London that commemorates the abolition of the slave trade there is not a single African person listed or depicted. For me this is a huge oversight that we can remedy - in this sense I am up for raising more statues to balance the narrative depicted in our public spaces. In my view this is not "historical revisionism" - it is addressing a historical omission.

So yes, couldn't agree more. The history is complex and difficult but we can all agree that slavery was wrong and the history needs to be looked squarely in the eye and addressed with more complexity. The British Empire stopped the slave trade but it still didn't stop the Bengal Famine, the massacre at Amritsar, The Boer Concentration Camps, various abuses committed against prisoners in Kenya, and various massacres in the Troubles, and the attitude of colonial adventurism still plays a part in our current foreign policy. It's uncomfortable, it's complex, and it's messy - which is precisely why we need incredible people in our armed forces to be at forefront of changing that history, empowering other nations, and being a demonstration of healthy decolonization. And I'm sure that you have done this work in your career as it is increasingly the mandate for our armed forces - especially after Tony Blair's adventurism in the Middle East.
Protest, organised peaceful protest? Yes. Violent riots that burned down black communities, destroyed black owned businesses and turned violence against anyone who wouldn’t bow to knee. The media didn’t help with misreporting and poor journalism.

Again, agreed. I looked at these things happening and remembered the riots that happened after Mark Duggan was shot in 2011. I lived in SE London at the time and helped clean up Peckham High Street and Northcote Road in Clapham. MLK once said, "A riot is the language of the unheard," and think this is what I reflect on when I see property damage. I'm pro non-violence, but I approve of civil disobedience and disruption just as MLK and Gandhi practiced (and is arguably practiced by the Extinction Rebellion) but I have sympathy for people who feel unheard by our current political systems, people who live in deprived communities where their chances of a good life are limited, and they are trapped in multigenerational poverty, substance abuse, poor health outcomes, mental health problems, and criminality. For me it seems logical that people who live in violent, deprived areas would turn to violence when they feel unheard. The question is - how do you change that? I don't know, but if our conversation gets either of us any closer to answering that question then the conversation is valuable.

My personal experience is this - when I attended BLM protests in the UK, they were all done very peacefully and in compliance with COVID-19 Government Guidance - much more like people's assemblies than anything else. This was also the case across much of the US - did this get reported on? Not as much, but there were some, and these are a bit closer to my experience.

In my opinion, the award for best people at protesting is tied between South Korea and Hong Kong.

Colin Kaepernick was an average NFL player. He was also rumoured to being booted off the team and there’s speculation that he did it to ensure that he couldn’t be sacked. Because it would look bad in the press.
The irony lost on everyone is that he was in a position of privilege, he was worth around $20 million. He is also in a sport that was majority black, a 68% majority.
Sure - I'd never heard of the guy myself and I'm not that interested in the NFL but I respect the guy for doing what he did in the way that he did it. Again, it was peaceful but clear and it made a statement about something he believed in - that's values-driven behaviour. The speculation is exactly that. And yeah, he was in a position of privilege which is exactly why it was powerful - he didn't need to care about Alton Sterling or Philando Castile, but he was moved by their deaths and decided to protest from his position of influence and privilege, using it for those who didn't have that advantage.

The suffragette movement came at a time when women really did suffer injustice and inequality. Because of old and different mindsets.
Emily Davison was a known extremist who was kicked out of several University groups for extremist views. She also had a return train ticket in her pocket when she was killed, and it’s speculated that she never meant to kill herself at all.
Women don’t face those injustices anymore, and the gender pay gap is a proven myth.
Sure - but the suffragette movement was also predominantly for white middle-class women, who like Davison, had access to University and wanted the right to vote. The suffragette movement and women's rights in general have had to progressively open up to other groups of women who were left behind: BAME women, disabled women, LGBT women, and the most recent debate is about trans women. For me this is another huge can of worms and as I'm a bloke I don't pretend to know anything about it.

My point with raising the suffragette movement was that it took a death to change public views. It took an almost literal sacrifice. This is violence of a very different kind but it is disruptive to people's lives and the cosy status quo. Imagine both of us being there, at that horse race, at that time. I wonder what we would have thought of her, or her cause. Personally, I think we would've felt a mixture of emotions, but among the crowd of men a sense of inconvenience that their day that races had been spoiled by these "hysterical women" would've been common. I sometimes wonder whether we still carry some of that attitude with us today. Personally, I know I do carry a bit that attitude. I sometimes find having female bosses difficult and have to check myself and imagine how I'd react to them if they were a bloke - that's how it works out practically, it's just self-honesty.

In my job I see that vulnerable women often face worse dangers than vulnerable men - they are regularly exploited, trafficked, abused, pimped, coerced, etc. often by their male counterparts. I've seen some *text deleted*ing horrendous stuff happen to white women in the UK, that wouldn't have happened if they were a man. For me, becoming a feminist has simply meant becoming more aware of the vulnerabilities that women face but also becoming more aware of their power as well - trying to become a better friend, father, son, brother, husband. I think that's probably just the same as everyone else here, and if that is the case then you're free to call yourself a feminist.

Martin Luther King would turn in his grave at this generations actions. He said “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”
The constant call for segregation and increase in racial tensions and false narratives. There’s even left wing students in the US who are calling for segregation again.
Well - if anyone's calling for segregation then they're an idiot and, frankly, we don't have to be worried about that happening. What we do have to worry about is how we good we are at making friends with people who have different views to us, and how good we are at listening to them with empathy and respect.

We can only speculate on what MLK would think of this current movement. I personally think he would have the wisdom to see through the media narrative and find a place of unity. He was always remarkable at making the principle of equality accessible to even the most disagreeable, bigoted people, by appealing to their common humanity. For me, the lack of this narrative is a real issue, but also important to reflect that MLK was being confrontational, divisive and provocative - even if he wasn't he being violent. Take for instance the Selma to Montgomery Marches - the authorities used their legal powers to call their peaceful protest an "unlawful assembly" and attack them. After the outcry, they were given the legal right to march. For me, this is an example of how being peacefully disruptive can bear good results. But we must remember that it was illegal, it was provocative, it was disruptive. We might also reflect on the fact that MLK was so controversial, he was killed for what he was doing.

Glad you agree re: Gandhi, but I have to disagree re: the Occupy Movement. I was actually living in London at the time and spent a good amount of time at the campsite that emerged on the steps of St Paul's Cathedral. Most of the protesters I spoke to had beliefs closer to democratic confederalism, although there were many counter-cultural beliefs represented. Either way, I think they did their best to highlight the influence of corporations on democracy.

Extinction rebellion doesn’t peacefully protest, they hamper people’s lives, they scaremonger and hold up other people’s lives with stunts, the irony being the after effects of holding up traffic or using products from the hydrocarbon and oil industries to protest is lost on them. They are a bunch of havering idiots. A lot of people don’t support them and are fed up with them and their stupid stunts. Pushing them from their causing.
Well, this is what I'm saying in regards to your agreement that MLK and Ghandi were a good model of nonviolence. Yes they were nonviolent, but they were disruptive and engaged in civil disobedience.
Extinction Rebellion are arguably very close to that in their methods, but by what you're saying here then even civil disobedience is too far. Gandhi, who you just praised, completely disrupted the economy of the British Raj when he led the Salt March. I'm sure a few people's days must have been inconvenienced by this.

Here is a genuine question for you: as a Royal Marine, if you had to protest against something you truly believed in, how would you do it? Also, have you ever protested? Have you ever felt you had a reason to? I don't know if it is appropriate for you to answer that publicly, so no worries if not, but I'm just interested.

The takeaway from all this is violence isn’t a sole answer. People don’t respond well threats of violence. Take antifa for example, they use masks and violence to silence people who hold different views? That is fascism.
Personally, I think the whole Antifa thing is a red-herring. I am anti-fascist. They are just idiots who are too socially isolated to start their own Fight Club.

You want people to listen? You make well balance arguments and go through the channels.
Otherwise people switch off and just dismiss it, especially when they go out and find their own facts.
I agree and disagree with this. In an ideal world, yes. But unfortunately there are still systems around that actively use those "proper channels" to skew and silence the voices of vulnerable people and warp aspects of our society like the justice system. Instead of going into it in detail I recommend you check out an amazing film named Just Mercy. I think you'd really like it - and I think it highlights the work of someone who I think represents exactly what you and I probably stand for. I found it really inspiring to watch and it helped me understand how prevalent some of these issues still are in certain parts of the US.
In the UK 2019/2020, 18 people died in police custody. Now I agree that we should be striving for 0 deaths. But this is real life. There’s any various reasons why it might happen, and maybe the police need to update their procedures.

But let’s break that number down.
  • Of the 18 deaths in or following police custody, 14 people were White, three were Black and the ethnicity of one person was unknown.
  • 11 of the 18 people were identified as having ‘mental health concerns’ and 14 were known to have a link to alcohol/or drugs. Two people were detained under the Mental Health Act.
  • Eight of the 18 people who died in or following police custody had force used against them either by officers or members of the public before their deaths. Of the people who were physically restrained, six were White and two were Black.
That is from independent review. But the way the left see it, is that it’s open season on ethnicities.
Now there is 107 deaths from police contact. These are listed as:
  • Six people were under 18.
  • 89 people were White, six were Black, seven were Asian and one person was from an ‘Other ethnic group’. The ethnicity was ‘unknown’ for four people.
  • Nine had force used against them, of which seven people were White, one was Black and the ethnicity of one person was ‘unknown’.
  • Half of those who died (54) were reported to be intoxicated by drugs and/or alcohol at the time of the incident or had known issues in this area.

Could you link that info please? I'd find that quite interesting.

So basically the reason why they're highlighting deaths in custody is because black people make up 3% of the population but account of 8% of deaths in custody which, if you think about it is an overrepresentation of approx 2.66 times for that demographic. Have a read of this, it's very Guardian but has some interesting points.

I did an interesting demographic exercise with my work recently where I analysed data from 100 rough sleepers and I found a massive overrepresentation of BAME people and Eastern Europeans in our homeless community.

I came across Ibram X Kendi years ago and didn’t think much of him apart from he was part of the mental gymnastics and making up his own definitions to terms.
I also came across a number of black people who disagreed with him. Some even compared him to a cult leader.
No worries, he's going to be everyone's bag. I only mention Ibram X Kendi because I've personally found his approach really liberating and quite helpful for these conversations. One of the things he talks about is that we need to have a culture of being honest about our biases and not "cancelling" people. Talking about race is so emotive, because none of us want to be racist and would feel really hurt and angry if we were accused of racism. So his solution is simple - allow people to be honest about being a bit racist and wanting to work on it. That's my approach now - I'm a mixed race guy who's probably pretty liberal but I'm probably still a bit racist and I'm working on it. I'm probably a bit mysoginist, but I'm working on it. I'm probably a bit homophobic/transphobic/classist, but I'm working on it. etc.

That's all it is, and I think if we're all honest then we'll all get there without biting each others heads off, and we can only work on ourselves.

Well, my friend. Really enjoying chatting to you. Seriously, thank you for the chinwag, I think on our small corner of the internet we are demonstrating that people can still have civil discourse and robust debate without it becoming a slanging match. As I said in a previous post, I often feel like a more honest person after having it out with someone but choosing to be on good terms afterwards. So again, thank you.

Hope you have an awesome evening, one and all.

Hersh
 

Hershey

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
43
Reaction score
67
There was a slave trade in Africa long before Europeans arrived on their shores.
The Arabs had a lucrative White slave trade and still have a continuing slave problem.
The Romans had a thriving slave trade.
The Vikings raped pillaged and enslaved.
Persian Empire.
Greeks.
The list is quite long, almost endless. Humans are tribal, we live and protect our little tribes and communities, if we didn’t like a fellow tribe, or they had something we needed, we fought for it. we have done since caveman times.
So I've dealt with a lot of the points in this post through my first response - just going to focus in on some from this one that aren't represented there.

RE: the above. Yes, slavery existed everywhere. Still does. There are more slaves in the world today than there have been at one time. I've met quite a few, I'm sure you have too. However, the unique contribution the British Empire made was creating whole institutions to justify the oppression and enslavement of "inferior nations" (which included a far larger catchment of non-white and some white people) through pseudo-science, Christian theology, economics, etc. It's the institutionalization of such beliefs and their effect on our culture that has long-lasting effects. It informs the art people make, the jobs they get selected for, the neighbourhoods they grow up in, racialized slavery is even expressed in the porn that they watch.

Does slavery's ubiquitous nature justify it? No, and of course you're not trying to say that. But I do think you're implying that we shouldn't think about it too much, on the basis of the comparison with these other cultures. I think we should, because we don't need to be ashamed that it happened, we need to become angry enough, and informed enough, to change the world for the better.

Also just an *text deleted*, the Persian Empire invented human rights and archaeological evidence at Persepolis suggests that they didn't use slaves, instead paying their workers fairly and inventing maternity pay while they were at it.

I’d be happy to discuss why 3rd wave feminism is a joke and isn’t true equality.
I also have a big interest in transgenderism and the physiological and psychological effects too, if you would want to discuss that aswell?

Crack on.

2 questions I will ask, just so this isn’t purely about race, is that there a section of the LBGTI+ community want to normalise adults being sexually attracted to children, do you support this view, i
And if there is more than 2 genders, how can someone be “Bisexual”?

Firstly what fresh pit of hell have you dug this disgusting view out of? Secondly, of course not. Part of my job involves safeguarding children from being exploited and sex trafficked by County Lines gangs. I helped the child of such a relationship enter the world safely. Furthermore, this will never happen due to the fact that we consider children to have "limited capacity", that's why it's known as statutory rape - the child cannot provide informed consent to participate in the act. In our community we quite often find horribly complex cases where a child has been groomed by a drug dealer and genuinely feels completely infatuated with them - this for me is utterly abhorrent and horrific. The law is clear - children, no matter how much they may feel that a relationship is healthy, cannot consent to a sexual relationship. Hopefully that clears up my view - and I think it probably clears up the majority of people's views as well, across the political spectrum. However, as a member of the public you probably need to know that you have a safeguarding duty to report the information you've seen, and those who have said it. Have you managed to do that yet?

Thirdly, the terms that we use for describing sexuality are always flexible, because scientists are always finding out more and more about human sexuality all the time, and we live in a society where people have the right to describe themselves any way they wish - it's one of the freedoms you fight for. Personally, the most helpful descriptor I've found for human sexuality is Alfred Kinsey's scale. It's probably most accurate to describe sexuality as a scale/spectrum as some people change over time and some people find that their sexual journey interacts with received ideas from society that might tell them they can only be one thing or the other.

Cheers,

Hersh
 

CallMeLucifer

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Dec 30, 2019
Posts
324
Reaction score
318
Interesting read so far from you two. But in regards to sexuality or the (dare I say it) 'lgbt community'. I'd say there is indeed a huge amount of crusty old men that want to normalise some form of pederasty. I remember back in the day having a few of them trying to inbox me despite them being old enough to be my father or grandfather. This becomes a bit more evident if you go to a gay club (which I'd never recommend on a personal level due to its debauchery). Here, if you are clearly young, you can expect granddads to try and hook up with you.

Another issue would be bug chasing. I've heard people try and brush it off as a myth, but it is still a subculture that still exists. With the likes of the HIV patient- O being a trailblazer in it. There's also a reason the likes of grinder has options regarding your status, too.

I'd go in more depth. But there's only so much I'm willing to type via phone.
 

Hershey

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Posts
43
Reaction score
67
Interesting read so far from you two. But in regards to sexuality or the (dare I say it) 'lgbt community'. I'd say there is indeed a huge amount of crusty old men that want to normalise some form of pederasty. I remember back in the day having a few of them trying to inbox me despite them being old enough to be my father or grandfather. This becomes a bit more evident if you go to a gay club (which I'd never recommend on a personal level due to its debauchery). Here, if you are clearly young, you can expect granddads to try and hook up with you.

Another issue would be bug chasing. I've heard people try and brush it off as a myth, but it is still a subculture that still exists. With the likes of the HIV patient- O being a trailblazer in it. There's also a reason the likes of grinder has options regarding your status, too.

I'd go in more depth. But there's only so much I'm willing to type via phone.
Sure, but what you're describing there is paedophilia. Yes, they may be using LGBT apps, services or clubs - but they're paedophiles. The same happens on Tinder in a straight context, the same happens in heterosexual pubs, clubs, universities, and other heterosexual spaces - but it doesn't get attached to the heterosexual community because it would tar all straight people with an unfair brush. Therefore I would encourage you to think of these people as paedophiles and sexual predators, to avoid unfairly tarring the rest of the LGBT community with it.

That bug chasing thing is mental. I work quite closely with the NHS hepatology team - I can confidently say I've never come across that subculture, but I'll have a chat with them about it and see what their thoughts are. I can't imagine what state of mind one would have to be in to actually want that Damoclean sword. One thing I will say is that it may be that Grindr has that setting because HIV+ people are more likely to date one another, especially if they're both in treatment and are down to an untraceable level of particulates on their regular tests. I think for the gay community as well trying to assist HIV+ positive to have a life means challenging the social and romantic "death sentence" it can seem to be. There are cases where two HIV+ people have got together and lived long happy lives together, so this may be part of the story behind including that function.
 

G_commando

Royal Marines Commando
Joined
Mar 18, 2019
Posts
157
Reaction score
251
Interesting read so far from you two. But in regards to sexuality or the (dare I say it) 'lgbt community'. I'd say there is indeed a huge amount of crusty old men that want to normalise some form of pederasty. I remember back in the day having a few of them trying to inbox me despite them being old enough to be my father or grandfather. This becomes a bit more evident if you go to a gay club (which I'd never recommend on a personal level due to its debauchery). Here, if you are clearly young, you can expect granddads to try and hook up with you.

Another issue would be bug chasing. I've heard people try and brush it off as a myth, but it is still a subculture that still exists. With the likes of the HIV patient- O being a trailblazer in it. There's also a reason the likes of grinder has options regarding your status, too.

I'd go in more depth. But there's only so much I'm willing to type via phone.
You have those views however I have a feeling your old and your views will never change. You do realise there are millions of straight people with him and there are millions of crusty old men just like you that take an interest in young girls. It's not just in the lgbt community that stuff like that happens.
 

Chelonian

Moderator
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Posts
11,837
Reaction score
14,927
This becomes a bit more evident if you go to a gay club (which I'd never recommend on a personal level due to its debauchery). Here, if you are clearly young, you can expect granddads to try and hook up with you.
As a straight 'granddad' I've had young lads try to pick me up in a gay bar in Torquay. It's a cracking bar; plenty of straight, fine looking women go there because it has a safe, pleasant atmosphere. My flaw is that my good looks, wit and charm are obviously irresistible. It's a burden I carry. :)

But it's not a problem. A polite "No thanks, mate" is that all is required. As a gay friend of mine once said "Regard it as a compliment. Some men are so ugly only a woman would consider shägging them!"
 

New Threads

Top