Laurence Fox on Question Time

[SuckingDieselFella]

It isn't ok to try and shut anyone up with remarks about their skin colour. It doesn't matter if that skin colour is white, black or green with purple spots.

His fellow actors have been told to "denounce" him. It looks like he can wave goodbye to his career. What lovely tolerant people the ultra woke are.
www.thestage.co.uk/news/2020/laurence-fox-labelled-a-disgrace-to-industry-following-question-time-race-row/

The working class girls were targeted because they were vulnerable and poor. The police dismissed reports about the abuse as the girls having made a "lifestyle choice:.

The reports into Rotherham showed that abuse of young women happened at the same rate in the communities the men came from, but was under reported.

Again a fundamental misunderstanding of what privilege is, undermines your use of this point

Blackface was not mostly associated with Morris Dancing in the UK
It is, across England and Wales. Even urban areas hold festivals with Morris Dancing.

Remember the Black and White Minstrel show? There was a history of it here for the same reason as the states.

Yes I remember my elderly black relatives watching it. They also watched Love Thy Neighbour
Not the same as in the states
Morris Dancing and festivals associated with it predate television and it has seen something of a revival recently.

Of course use of language is important, uppity has racial connotations.

Not in the UK

What is even funnier is that your attempt to prove this is based on a misunderstanding of how privilege works

You mean the knapsack all white people carry around from birth, crammed full of 26 privileges. That privilege?

Blackface in the UK was associated with music hall which is where the Black and White minstrels had its origins, this was far more popular than Morris dancing.

Uppity does have racial connotations in the UK, but even if it was historically different it is still being used in the same way, to describe a POC who should "know their place". In any case in the 21st century where these issues are discussed globally ( and over a decade following its usage, and critisism in the Obama election), its not a good excuse.

My argument is that the reports into the grooming gang cases showed that the levels of abuse of young women were the same within the community the men came from. So yes my point is correct and yours is incorrect.

There have been a number of reports. The Manchester report this week. Also court evidence and judges summing up when it has been stated that
The police were scared to persue prosecution because they were afraid of being called racist
That the gangs used racist language and that they specifically targeted white girls.

The working class girls were targeted because they were vulnerable and poor.

This is a misconception that was pointed out in the Jay Report. They were not all vulnerable or poor. In fact some only became vulnerable and poor, or known to social services, after the gangs had started to abuse and traffic them.

That thing about the police doesn't ring true when you find out that Asian men are more likely to get stopped and searched, and more likely to be arrested (but no more likely to be convicted) than white men.

So why is it for other crimes the police are fine about arresting asian men but not for these? Could this be an excuse? Especially as in Rotherham (and other places) the complaints were dismissed by the police?

Again, if the levels of abuse happen at the same rate within the communities that these men come from is it a "racist" thing?

Yes the use of racist language is deplorable, but these extremely terrible cases should not be used by people to try to prove the fact that white privilege does not exist. White privilege does not exclude you from never having to deal with negative effects of race for one thing.

The reports into Rotherham showed that abuse of young women happened at the same rate in the communities the men came from, but was under reported.

I am the relative of a grooming victim. This is a lie. Sarah Champion and Greg Hands say one million girlS across the country have been grooming victims.

Show your evidence, Does it makes you feel good and virtuous to lie about children who've been raped and prostituted by adults? Why do you do this? Why tell such blatant provable lies

Ive read the Jay report, it states that "many of the children were already vulnerable when the grooming began", a large number of them were already in care. However not being in care or not being known to social services does not mean you were not vulnerable.

Ive read the Jay report, it states that "many of the children were already vulnerable when the grooming began", a large number of them were already in care. However not being in care or not being known to social services does not mean you were not vulnerable.

Oh shit. Why did nobody tell me they were 'vulnerable'

Katie Hopkins has found her new husband, surely?

That thing about the police doesn't ring true when you find out that Asian men are more likely to get stopped and searched, and more likely to be arrested (but no more likely to be convicted) than white men.

What do you mean by 'Asian men'?

So why is it for other crimes the police are fine about arresting asian men but not for these? Could this be an excuse? Especially as in Rotherham (and other places) the complaints were dismissed by the police?

Yes dismissed repeatedly

Again, if the levels of abuse happen at the same rate within the communities that these men come from is it a "racist" thing?

These are crimes of CSE that included evidence given that the girls were targeted because they were white and racially abused. This is in the court evidence and police statements

Yes the use of racist language is deplorable, but these extremely terrible cases should not be used by people to try to prove the fact that white privilege does not exist. White privilege does not exclude you from never having to deal with negative effects of race for one thing

Like most people in the UK, I don't agree with the theory white privilege. I'm assuming you're from the USA?

I'm not lying Amylox, its in the reports.

I didn't tell lies about the children either.

I was making the point that it happens to women in the community too, and these women are less likely to report it.

Ive read the Jay report, it states that "many of the children were already vulnerable when the grooming began", a large number of them were already in care.

You need to read more than the Jay Report
The local press on each case, about 60 or 70 gangs so far and not all of them reach the national papers. Also the trial and police statements, particularly in The Times and the report this week in the Manchester Evening News.
A lot of those who were in care only ended up in care because the families were being targeted by the gangs. They were in care AFTER the gangs had abused the girls.

However not being in care or not being known to social services does not mean you were not vulnerable.

Not sure what you mean and seems an odd thing to say
All children are vulnerable. These gangs are predators!!!

"What do you mean by Asian men" , that's the term the govermment uses when publishing its statistics, it means men from India/Pakistan/Bangladesh etc here.

So the Jay report which notes that it is a myth that these crimes were driven by a hatred of white women, precisely for the same reasons as I have said, because they were abusing women in their own community too.

Lots of people in the UK believe that white privilege exists, it certainly exists in the UK.

I've read more than they Jay report, I've read a huge amount of information and data regarding these cases.

Of course all children are vulnerable but there are levela of the vulnerability which make it more likely that you could become the victom of CSE.

But again, this is an appalling example to use to try to show that white privilege doesn't exist, and one based on a misunderstanding or what privilege is.

Its also an utter appeal to emotion.

malylis
I disagree with you and fear the conversation is going round in circles
You appear to me to believe these girls are privileged and so it's all a big fuss over nothing. That's how it seems. Sorry

I didn't say there was a big fuss over nothing, nice straw man.

Again you are totally misunderstanding what privilege in this context means. Repeatedly I've said that it doesn't mean you can't be negatively effected.

Yeah OP, you clearly dont understand the concept of privilege. Its not a case of 'disagreeing'. If you accept that black peole experience higher levels of racism then you automically accept the idea of white privilege. The little anecdotes you can come up with about individual cases make zero difference.

Maybe try and understand someting rather than boring on about this supposedly endless force of the 'woke brigade'. You're the same s people who 10 years ago talked at their workmates bout the PC Brigade and EU bananas.

@malylis

The Danny Baker thing? I don't believe he intended it to be racist, but it was.

You admit that there was no racial malice or intention behind Danny Baker’s actions but still believe he was racist nonetheless; not stupid, lacking in judgment or foolish, but racist.

And yet racism is defined as “prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.”

There’s just no reasoning with your logic... He’s lost his job and career, been “cancelled”, all because some people equated what he tweeted with something that a person could have tweeted if they wanted to have pushed their own racial superiority.

Although I have no particular affinity for the man, I’m thinking it’s Danny Baker who’s been bullied and wantonly misrepresented here. He’s lost his career on the altar of this McCarthy-ite campaign to find racism where there is none, and then punish it with unrelenting fury. It is a modern day witch-hunt, but it’s ok because Danny Baker was a rich and (apparently) a bit of a twat.

newyears I don’t at all think what I posted last night was nonsense. I’ve thought very carefully about it. I thought very carefully at the time it happened. I have never posted anything I know to be nonsense.

The right wing are on the rise.

It is happening now in plain sight.

Be careful what you wish for.

If you accept that black peole experience higher levels of racism then you automically accept the idea of white privilege

Although I’ve written quite a bit disagreeing with those pushing this, I nonetheless believe there is “white privilege” and that as a white person - all other things being equal - I am in a more privileged position than a black person, and that I should be aware of this in my daily life, particularly in interactions with POC.

However, whereas this is generally true, there are exceptions, such as the Rotherham case.

I love that Lawrence Fox believes he is the person best placed to judge levels of racism in the UK.

He is in The ST today (page 3, News Section: friends in High Places, eh?) saying he won't date women under 35 and once dumped one for being 'too Woke'. Don't worry, Laurence: I don't think you'll be fending them off!