Shea said:

Wow yes, the discrimmination faced by straight white men in Britain is horrendous (rolls eyes). Ah the Daily Mail, words fail me.

Posted on 26 June 2008 at 6:34 PM

Mwezzi said:

I personally don't think the new law will do much and I'm not particularly sure it was the best idea due to reactions like this, but it's not going to stop men from working! The law doesn't force employers to recruit either women or minority groups, it merely says they can show this preference. To be honest, I doubt that many of them will be suddenly jumping at the opportunity to hire people they could have hired before and didn't.

Posted on 26 June 2008 at 7:00 PM

Amity said:

I like how they call it a 'jobs ban.' Yes, those evil PC police are going to BAN all white men from working and just let all of the minorities and womenfolk do the work so they can rest on their outraged laurels. That'll learn 'em.

Posted on 26 June 2008 at 8:20 PM

Anna said:

It's not the Daily Mail, it's the Daily Express - and The Guardian, The Times, The BBC etc etc

There has been across the board negative reporting of this.

Do we really think that we can remove discrimination by ... adding more discrimination? Really? Will that make society a better place?

Posted on 26 June 2008 at 8:33 PM

Torygirl said:

Well the Mail today said that women are going to be more equal than men. Really???

Posted on 26 June 2008 at 8:49 PM

Anne Onne said:

I don't understand.

I mean, think about the scenario. You interview a white man and a black woman, for example, both equally qualified, and you only have one position open. Clearly, you can only choose one. Were they really discouraged legally from choosing the woman before? Or is this supposed to be encouraging employers to think about hiring the woman when they would probably have chosen the man before? What's so suspect about telling people they CAN hire women or minorities?

It says a lot that people decry that employers CAN show this preference, when thinking about it, there should be a 50% chance of either event. In which case,you'd think if this scenario came up, 50% of employers would have chosen the black woman. Evidently, they don't in real life, but there seems to be this fear that suddenly, white men won't get picked preferentially as much. Boo hoo.

Posted on 26 June 2008 at 10:35 PM

james said:

"Clearly, you can only choose one [of to equal candidates]. Were they really discouraged legally from choosing the woman before?"

I've answered this in more detail in the other thread. The short version is you're obviously not legally encouraged/discouraged from choosing anyone and can choose whoever you want. But if you choose whoever you want because they are a man/woman/black/white this is sex/race discrimination and illegal.

Posted on 26 June 2008 at 11:04 PM

Jess said:

There is certainly no ban on white men getting jobs. FFS. I think, though, this is a perfect example of backlash.

The Express isn't any more sexist today than it was yesterday. And remember it had the same reaction to a recruitment day for women and ethnic minorities. The point is, the Express is unabashadly sexist, and so, yes, attempting to edge through some reforms as Harman has done sets them off. But that's no reason not to go ahead with the reforms.

See the other thread for more discussion of this...

Posted on 26 June 2008 at 11:27 PM

Glenda C said:

"Wow yes, the discrimmination faced by straight white men in Britain is horrendous (rolls eyes). "

Why are you then suprised if people take the same view of complaints?

Posted on 26 June 2008 at 11:58 PM

Shea said:

Sorry Anna, I see the words "racism", "xenophobia" or "homophobia" and the reflex response kicks in, its almost Pavlovian (and right about 99% of the time).

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 12:06 AM

Liz said:

I said this before on a previous post but

If white men are losing, who's winning?

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 12:24 AM

Kuja said:

@ Torygirl:
Sounds like Animal Farm to me!

Does this law actually do anything other than remind people that women and minorities exist and "could" be chosen? As Anne Onne said, the option of hiring the black woman has always been there, and it's still there. Is there any change at all...?

And I know several white, straight men who will think of this as ammunition for their rants about how "the country hates them and they're seen as pure evil, just because they've been privileged in the past and they're being discriminated against now..." *rolls eyes*

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 12:40 AM

Seph said:

I don't think this whole positive discrimination thing was exactly a lightbulb moment, but still, ugh ¬¬

Has anyone called it "Political Correctness gone Mad!1111" yet?

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 1:02 AM

Jane said:

Poor dears.

There's a fantastic line in The Simpsons about this very thing. Grandpa says: "I'm an old man. Nobody listens to my ideas". Lisa says: "I'm a little girl. Nobody listens to my ideas". Then Homer strolls in and says: "I'm a white male between 18 and 50. Everybody listens to my ideas. No matter how dumb they are". Then he pulls out a tub on which is written: Nuts and Gum. Together at Last

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 11:01 AM

Jennifer-Ruth said:

"Has anyone called it "Political Correctness gone Mad!1111" yet?"

Why yes, I did see this over on the BBC Have Your Say boards. The reading comprehension over there is very poor - most people went straight down the "ZOMG white men are so oppressed!!11" route.

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 11:56 AM

Cara said:

*sigh* *eye roll*
Yep, poor poor white men!
Ooooh and we evil PCgornmad feminists want to ban everything! We just love banning stuff! *cackles*.
Really. I. don't. get. it. GRRRRRRRR.

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 12:04 PM

Cara said:

Oh yes and "ethnics" - WHAT?

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 2:40 PM

Amy said:

The BBC 'Have Your Say' boards are always SOOO reactionary. Just goes to show how most people fail to read the actual article and just use the headline as an excuse to have a fit about how the whole world is 'feminised' etc. Very depressing. And I'm not surprised by the Express *at all*. I'm only shocked that they didn't manage to get something about Princess Di in the story as well.

As for the bill, I think it stops just short of being useful... of course it gives the right message, and maybe Harman wanted to go further but couldn't... but employers just being told that they 'can' employ a woman/member of an ethnic minority group over a white man probably won't do much to address inequality. Imagine telling a sexist/racist employer "oh you can pick the black woman, it's perfectly okay, the government doesn't mind". They'll just say "thanks" and pick the white man anyway, right? Perhaps justifying it by saying, well, the black woman just had a week's less experience, etc. I know no-one would want to feel they got a job "just because" of their race/sex, but I do believe a period of positive discrimination to redress the terrible imbalances in most workplaces would be a good thing, and Harman's bill just doesn't go far enough imo.

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 3:09 PM

Aimee said:

How dare we consider women and, ahem, *ethnics* equal to white men? How dare we politely ask to be considered and how dare we consider diversity a good thing? What awful PC nazi whacked out lefty loonies we are!

Posted on 27 June 2008 at 3:58 PM

Lucy said:

This bill is not only of concern for 'white men'. In areas such as nursing, primary school teaching and social care authorities will (I believe) be encouraged to pick candidates who are male and/or from an ethnic minority, as these groups are underepresented in these professions.

I am a white woman myself about to embark on a social work degree programme I have to admit that it does make one feel a bit nervous. Based on the demographic I observed at my interview days (I must have met around 50 other candidates at various unis, of whom perhaps 5 were male and one was non-white), why should the demographic in the profession itself not reflect the demographic of the people who want to do this work? I agree that we should look at the reasons why certain groups do not apply for certain jobs, but I cannot agree that I should be overlooked for a position based on the colour of my skin, which, with all the level headed analysis in the world, is what it FEELS like this bill is proposing.

Posted on 29 June 2008 at 2:58 PM

Lindsey Spilman said:

It is amazing that women have endured thousands of years of oppression and exclusion silently until the 20th centaury (and many continue to do so even in the 21st centaury). Then as soon as men get a whisper of the possibility of exclusion there is noise with in less then a generation. Men appear to feel oppressed when they cannot be in full control. (I do not know if I am allowed to say the following on here) The oppression of women is not a trait unique to just white men, as it has occurred in most cultures at some point. The problem is that white men (and white people in general) have had more world power. The anti-feminist media have the goal of ruining feminism by dividing every one to alter focus away from feminism and onto other issues. The whole white man thing that the media often brings up is just a way of chipping away at feminism even more as it creates a conflict and division when race is mentioned. The other day I was out walking and over herd two white females taking about this issue. Instead of talking about this as a small breakthrough for women, there focus was on how soon there will be no England as we are being taken over…. The daily express are forgetting that lots of white men in parliament have also agreed to the new legislation. I am optimistic that racism will be soon extinct. When it is sexism will not be resolved unless there is a world wide feminist movement that is able to go for full equality in every aspect of life, one that can over come all the distractions that anti-feminist individuals in the media are using. Many women do not realise how powerful we can be when we stand together.
Even constantly using slim made up women in adverts, while at the same time having a woman’s page full of ways to loss weight is sending out one other kick at feminism. It divides women on the basis of bodily differences and sets them unachievable goals. It tells women to be slim, then on the next page it will show shoes that will make anyone think twice about moving about too much.

Posted on 01 July 2008 at 11:30 AM