ChaoticMusings

Maddog · Go Outside

RE: Is Reform MP racist or just saying what some people think?

Magica · Go Outside

Regarding Khan, he does nothing for Londoners at all. The police are opening up 900 cases where girls were raped, abused. Khan won't answer when questioned did he know it was muslims.

He has covered up people think. Now we will see when police investigate. He is the worst mayor in history and racist against whites!

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Fluffy wrote:
Syl wrote:
People, including MP's should be allowed to say what they feel. The more outspoken they are the more they will come under fire, and some comments can boost or ruin a career overnight.

What this woman said is thought to be extremely racist by some, so Fluffy, you are certainly not alone in your view.
Others will say they think she (judging by that one interview) is a racist, just to pander to the woke fashion that seems to be sweeping the country now.
Others will think it's her opinion, she is entitled to say it, and factually she is right anyway re the numbers of black people in ads.

She was answering a callers question on the programme....whether it was a set up or not, who knows, it probably boosted the programme's ratings.
I have to admit this illusion of a "woke brigade sweeping the country" intrigues me and it's not just you that has stated this Syl by any means.
The woke movement in itself has been totally drowned out by those with right wing views who go on marches saying "Get rid of Immigrants" , set fire to hotels because they house immigrants and openly object to having a Muslim London mayor. It is Reform, an extreme right wing party that are the most popular with the British electorates and it is Reform's ideals that are echoed and made legitimate in the media. It is Reform right wing concerns, the obsession with the small boats for example that dominated every news channel for literally months.It is EXTREME RiGHT WING politics officially sweeping Britain and of course America.
All you hear about is illegal immigration, it has got better recently but for months it dominated. So what left wing voices are making themselves heard?Mine here. Well that's not going to achieve much is it,
The right have the megaphone and have no intention of stopping their divisive rhetoric anytime soon.
Btw,I don't know what the put down "woke" is meant to mean but to me it just means common sense. If I am.considered "woke" for seeing people as equal.and wanting the homeless to be housed and the poor to be less poor then I guess I'm woke.I think billionaires who rule the airwaves could pay a little more tax. If these are extreme leftie views then so be it.🤷

There are too many points to answer in one post.

Start with WOKE.

I think nowadays some people are knocking themselves out to appear to be... 'woke', and I don't really like the word because it's now used to feel superior, or alternatively put down people...a bit like calling people racist, or conspiracy theorists.

I think we can all be aware of racial prejudice and discrimination without bending over backwards and discriminating against white races....which is what some seem to be doing now.

When the major broadcasting company in the UK goes into schools and colleges and interviews mostly black and Asian kids, ignoring the majority....THAT to me is being racist. You see it as a good thing.

When TV advertising companies use a lot less none white actors (per population %) to star in the ads...that to me is discriminating against whites.

If someone points that out, albeit in a loud and aggressive manner, SHE is called racist, and I suspect many of the people who are calling her racist, are in fact....WOKE. (sorry)

As for people openly objecting to having a London Mayor because he is Muslim, I think the majority object because he is a true racist, hypocritical idiot.

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Magica wrote:
Regarding Khan, he does nothing for Londoners at all. The police are opening up 900 cases where girls were raped, abused. Khan won't answer when questioned did he know it was muslims.

He has covered up people think. Now we will see when police investigate. He is the worst mayor in history and racist against whites!

He is a disgrace....trying to be clever at the expense of the hundreds of young kids who have been /still are, raped and passed around by Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs.

Magica · Go Outside

Syl wrote:
Magica wrote:
Regarding Khan, he does nothing for Londoners at all. The police are opening up 900 cases where girls were raped, abused. Khan won't answer when questioned did he know it was muslims.

He has covered up people think. Now we will see when police investigate. He is the worst mayor in history and racist against whites!
He is a disgrace....trying to be clever at the expense of the hundreds of young kids who have been /still are, raped and passed around by Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs.

Yes he is. He is detested here. Corrupt, racist, liar amongst other things and he was knighted for it!

Date: Nov 2 8:02 AM, 2025

I think there's a mistake being made all round, which is an assumption that the mix of races shown in a TV ad should be in proportion to the mix across the general population. There's absolutely no reason why that should be the case, unless anyone can point out a good reason why it should be.

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Anonymous wrote:
I think there's a mistake being made all round, which is an assumption that the mix of races shown in a TV ad should be in proportion to the mix across the general population. There's absolutely no reason why that should be the case, unless anyone can point out a good reason why it should be.

Go to any country, and the faces you will see on TV will represent that country.

According to the last national census, 81% of the country identify as white.

Presumably then the vast majority of people going for jobs in advertising are white. So, unless the black people can do the job better....they are getting picked on the sole premise that they are black.

Is that fair?

It seemed like a trivial subject at first, but the more one thinks about it, the more it does seem unfair. If this happens in TV ads, what other jobs are being given to people because of their colour. It's racism in reverse.

Magica · Go Outside

Syl wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I think there's a mistake being made all round, which is an assumption that the mix of races shown in a TV ad should be in proportion to the mix across the general population. There's absolutely no reason why that should be the case, unless anyone can point out a good reason why it should be.
Go to any country, and the faces you will see on TV will represent that country.
According to the last national census, 81% of the country identify as white.
Presumably then the vast majority of people going for jobs in advertising are white. So, unless the black people can do the job better....they are getting picked on the sole premise that they are black.
Is that fair?

It seemed like a trivial subject at first, but the more one thinks about it, the more it does seem unfair. If this happens in TV ads, what other jobs are being given to people because of their colour. It's racism in reverse.

In jobs that happened a few years ago, they got the job simply because they were black, Indian etc.

Not sure if that still applies, but yes it's racist. Doesn't seem to count as racist if people are white.

Date: Nov 2 12:14 PM, 2025

Syl wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I think there's a mistake being made all round, which is an assumption that the mix of races shown in a TV ad should be in proportion to the mix across the general population. There's absolutely no reason why that should be the case, unless anyone can point out a good reason why it should be.
Go to any country, and the faces you will see on TV will represent that country.
According to the last national census, 81% of the country identify as white.
Presumably then the vast majority of people going for jobs in advertising are white. So, unless the black people can do the job better....they are getting picked on the sole premise that they are black.
Is that fair?

It seemed like a trivial subject at first, but the more one thinks about it, the more it does seem unfair. If this happens in TV ads, what other jobs are being given to people because of their colour. It's racism in reverse.

I don't think it works that way. The company that's advertising decides who they want to represent their brand, and the casting director will choose accordingly from whichever talent agency or agencies they use. It's up to the advertiser to decide what racial mix they want.

Red Okktober · Getting Gobby

Anonymous wrote:
I think there's a mistake being made all round, which is an assumption that the mix of races shown in a TV ad should be in proportion to the mix across the general population. There's absolutely no reason why that should be the case, unless anyone can point out a good reason why it should be.

It doesn't have to be an exact match, but when it's so heavily skewed it becomes unrealistic.

This lady chose her words badly - you really need to be careful these days - but the point she made was a valid one. If the races were skewed the other way and say just 1% non-white actors appeared in TV ads, then there would be uproar and the racist accusations would be shouted from the rooftops.

Someone said further up that 'it doesn't matter' what colour the actors are - of course it bloody matters - not least to the companies the actors are representing, and is why there are castings. The non-white actors haven't been randomly picked out of a hat, they have been chosen in part due to the colour of their skin.

Red Okktober · Getting Gobby

I just read that Starmer said her comments were 'shocking racism' and that Farage has shown 'absolutley no leadership' by not taking action against her.

I suppose not dissimilar to how he took no action against Rayner and Reeves for far more important issues

I heard someone down the pub describe him by the old-fashioned word 'chump' - which fits him perfectly!

Magica · Go Outside

Red Okktober wrote:
I just read that Starmer said her comments were 'shocking racism' and that Farage has shown 'absolutley no leadership' by not taking action against her.

I suppose not dissimilar to how he took no action against Rayner and Reeves for far more important issues

I heard someone down the pub describe him by the old-fashioned word 'chump' - which fits him perfectly!

Chump

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Anonymous wrote:
Syl wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I think there's a mistake being made all round, which is an assumption that the mix of races shown in a TV ad should be in proportion to the mix across the general population. There's absolutely no reason why that should be the case, unless anyone can point out a good reason why it should be.
Go to any country, and the faces you will see on TV will represent that country.
According to the last national census, 81% of the country identify as white.
Presumably then the vast majority of people going for jobs in advertising are white. So, unless the black people can do the job better....they are getting picked on the sole premise that they are black.
Is that fair?

It seemed like a trivial subject at first, but the more one thinks about it, the more it does seem unfair. If this happens in TV ads, what other jobs are being given to people because of their colour. It's racism in reverse.
I don't think it works that way. The company that's advertising decides who they want to represent their brand, and the casting director will choose accordingly from whichever talent agency or agencies they use. It's up to the advertiser to decide what racial mix they want.

That's the way it should work.

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Red Okktober wrote:
I just read that Starmer said her comments were 'shocking racism' and that Farage has shown 'absolutley no leadership' by not taking action against her.

I suppose not dissimilar to how he took no action against Rayner and Reeves for far more important issues

I heard someone down the pub describe him by the old-fashioned word 'chump' - which fits him perfectly!

Starmer...the same man who took no action against many of the gangs who were grooming, raping and passing around young white kids to family and friends whilst he was head of the CPS.

Magica · Go Outside

Syl wrote:
Red Okktober wrote:
I just read that Starmer said her comments were 'shocking racism' and that Farage has shown 'absolutley no leadership' by not taking action against her.

I suppose not dissimilar to how he took no action against Rayner and Reeves for far more important issues

I heard someone down the pub describe him by the old-fashioned word 'chump' - which fits him perfectly!
Starmer...the same man who took no action against many of the gangs who were grooming, raping and passing around young white kids to family and friends whilst he was head of the CPS.

I detest him, he doesn't care about any of us at all. Oh god I wish they got rid of him, he's no leader, just a wimp!

Date: Nov 2 1:04 PM, 2025

Red Okktober wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I think there's a mistake being made all round, which is an assumption that the mix of races shown in a TV ad should be in proportion to the mix across the general population. There's absolutely no reason why that should be the case, unless anyone can point out a good reason why it should be.
It doesn't have to be an exact match, but when it's so heavily skewed it becomes unrealistic.

Maybe so, but we shouldn't think TV advertising is meant to represent reality, it never has. We're talking about advertising, not a real-life documentary.

At the end of the day it's the brand that's choosing the actors, and whatever reason they have for choosing the racial mix must in the end come down to maximising their return on investment.

Red Okktober · Getting Gobby

Magica wrote:

Chump

It fits him to a T

"A chump is a sucker or a fool — someone who is very gullible. If a con artist (Macron) cheats you out of money, you may end up feeling like a chump. Chump is a very informal word for someone who falls for every trick and scheme, or who believes everything you tell them."

Fluffy · Musing at the Chaos

Syl wrote:
Magica wrote:
Regarding Khan, he does nothing for Londoners at all. The police are opening up 900 cases where girls were raped, abused. Khan won't answer when questioned did he know it was muslims.

He has covered up people think. Now we will see when police investigate. He is the worst mayor in history and racist against whites!
He is a disgrace....trying to be clever at the expense of the hundreds of young kids who have been /still are, raped and passed around by Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs.

Yes this was particularly sly behaviour. He was feigning confusion in an attempt to prompt her to say the ethnicity of the grooming gangs. She was clever though and didn't fall for the bait.

Not one of his finest moments. He should be concerned about the gangs not trying to score political points.

Magica · Go Outside

He's detested in London! The sooner he goes the better!

Fluffy · Musing at the Chaos

Anonymous wrote:
I think there's a mistake being made all round, which is an assumption that the mix of races shown in a TV ad should be in proportion to the mix across the general population. There's absolutely no reason why that should be the case, unless anyone can point out a good reason why it should be.

I agree Anon. As long as there is a healthy proportion of all races visible there is no reason for complaint.

White people are in most brand advertising especially for beauty industry , make up and shampoo adverts etc. Most of the L'oreal models and celebrities pouting "You're worth it " are white with a few token ladies of colour in.the mix in.an attempt to pretend the beauty ideal isn't white.

Sarah Pochin stating she saw hardly any white families or not enough white families is just untrue. White people appear in most adverts , sometimes along side a person of colour. What's wrong with that? 🤷 She was complaining about nothing.

If she wants advertising to represent the population she knows damn well that it would be completely dominated by white people. Why would she want that,?