| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? 19:34 - Jan 20 with 30158 views | Dubtractor |
Obviously he is a bellend, but if anything defines privilege, it is that he was given a platform to perform on a national TV show when he has precisely nil musical talent. Nothing about his appearance is about talent, nothing whatsoever.
I should add, it is worth a listen to his performance to marvel at just how bad it is. It isn't even mediocre, its utterly awful.
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/tv/video-lawrence-fox-performing-je [Post edited 20 Jan 2020 19:58]
|  |
| |  |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 19:15 - Jan 21 with 2493 views | jeera |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 19:12 - Jan 21 by GeoffSentence |
If you are going to come out with a statement like that, you really need to back it up. |
Evidence:
 |  |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 19:33 - Jan 21 with 2499 views | eireblue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 12:42 - Jan 21 by Oxford_Blue |
But that’s not the context and context is everything.
The point made to him was that he couldn’t hold a view (that Britain isn’t a racist country) because of his own colour and gender and the context was therefore that these traits made him less able to have a valid opinion. |
That wasn’t the point being made to him, that he decided to interrupt. |  | | |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 20:12 - Jan 21 with 2474 views | Enigma_Blue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 19:12 - Jan 21 by GeoffSentence |
If you are going to come out with a statement like that, you really need to back it up. |
It has come out on Twitter that she has been employed by the BBC as a researcher in the past. This is not proof of course that she was a plant.
So I can't actually back up my statement, but then all the people who claim the criticism of Meghan by the British Media is due to racism just like this woman can't actually back up their statements either. |  | | |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 22:07 - Jan 21 with 2427 views | Oxford_Blue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 19:33 - Jan 21 by eireblue |
That wasn’t the point being made to him, that he decided to interrupt. |
Clearly it was.
The academic said that the problem with him was he was a white privileged male. She used clearly racist and gender specific terms to denigrate his view, not reason or evidence.
Fact is, a lot on here don’t like him because he has money and speaks well.
There’s inverted snobbery a plenty. | | | |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 22:45 - Jan 21 with 2402 views | tractordownsouth |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 20:12 - Jan 21 by Enigma_Blue |
It has come out on Twitter that she has been employed by the BBC as a researcher in the past. This is not proof of course that she was a plant.
So I can't actually back up my statement, but then all the people who claim the criticism of Meghan by the British Media is due to racism just like this woman can't actually back up their statements either. |
Look at the articles of her and Kate Middleton doing pretty much the same things ( holding her baby bump, eating avocado) and look at the difference in coverage. |  |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 23:21 - Jan 21 with 2378 views | Herbivore |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 22:07 - Jan 21 by Oxford_Blue |
Clearly it was.
The academic said that the problem with him was he was a white privileged male. She used clearly racist and gender specific terms to denigrate his view, not reason or evidence.
Fact is, a lot on here don’t like him because he has money and speaks well.
There’s inverted snobbery a plenty. |
You're an idiot. |  |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 23:32 - Jan 21 with 2366 views | Enigma_Blue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 22:45 - Jan 21 by tractordownsouth |
Look at the articles of her and Kate Middleton doing pretty much the same things ( holding her baby bump, eating avocado) and look at the difference in coverage. |
Yes I agree that there has been a difference in coverage but it's the fact that people just assume it is down to pure racism. The press all loved Meghan when they first started dating & even when they announced their engagement, they all thought she would be like a breath of fresh air for the monarchy.
The press have turned against her now due her & Harry's hypocrisy regarding climate change. You know urging people to ' take action now' despite flying around in private jets. Then Meghan's constant moaning about how hard life is for her now due to the intense media spotlight. Surely Harry must have warned her what life was going to be like as a member of the Royal family.
Remember how badly the press went after the Duchess of York Sarah Ferguson back in the day, what was the reason for that? or is being ginger considered being of a minority race also. [Post edited 21 Jan 2020 23:48]
| | | |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 23:49 - Jan 21 with 2344 views | jeera |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 23:32 - Jan 21 by Enigma_Blue |
Yes I agree that there has been a difference in coverage but it's the fact that people just assume it is down to pure racism. The press all loved Meghan when they first started dating & even when they announced their engagement, they all thought she would be like a breath of fresh air for the monarchy.
The press have turned against her now due her & Harry's hypocrisy regarding climate change. You know urging people to ' take action now' despite flying around in private jets. Then Meghan's constant moaning about how hard life is for her now due to the intense media spotlight. Surely Harry must have warned her what life was going to be like as a member of the Royal family.
Remember how badly the press went after the Duchess of York Sarah Ferguson back in the day, what was the reason for that? or is being ginger considered being of a minority race also. [Post edited 21 Jan 2020 23:48]
|
The kind of papers being referred to here will do what they've always done.
They will print whatever they believe will create the most attention in order for profit gains.
I doubt too many of the journalists/editors involved publish much of their own personal views on anything; it's all about target audience and telling readers what they want to hear. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 07:35 - Jan 22 with 2271 views | eireblue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 23:32 - Jan 21 by Enigma_Blue |
Yes I agree that there has been a difference in coverage but it's the fact that people just assume it is down to pure racism. The press all loved Meghan when they first started dating & even when they announced their engagement, they all thought she would be like a breath of fresh air for the monarchy.
The press have turned against her now due her & Harry's hypocrisy regarding climate change. You know urging people to ' take action now' despite flying around in private jets. Then Meghan's constant moaning about how hard life is for her now due to the intense media spotlight. Surely Harry must have warned her what life was going to be like as a member of the Royal family.
Remember how badly the press went after the Duchess of York Sarah Ferguson back in the day, what was the reason for that? or is being ginger considered being of a minority race also. [Post edited 21 Jan 2020 23:48]
|
The press were accused by racism when they were engaged as well.
Harry complained about the coverage straight away.
So the negative coverage has been fairly consistent. | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 07:49 - Jan 22 with 2259 views | eireblue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 22:07 - Jan 21 by Oxford_Blue |
Clearly it was.
The academic said that the problem with him was he was a white privileged male. She used clearly racist and gender specific terms to denigrate his view, not reason or evidence.
Fact is, a lot on here don’t like him because he has money and speaks well.
There’s inverted snobbery a plenty. |
You are misrepresenting. The transcript is available.
What is amusing about your point is a reference to evidence.
Later in that discussion we be buzzfeed article was raised. Lawrence hadn’t seen it.
So the one person self acknowledged as speaking from ignorance to n the topic being raised was Lawrence.
I wonder if you agree with the principle that it is the target of abuse, not the abuser, that gets to decide what is abuse or racist.
[Post edited 22 Jan 2020 7:59]
| | | |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:09 - Jan 22 with 2244 views | hampstead_blue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 20:12 - Jan 21 by Enigma_Blue |
It has come out on Twitter that she has been employed by the BBC as a researcher in the past. This is not proof of course that she was a plant.
So I can't actually back up my statement, but then all the people who claim the criticism of Meghan by the British Media is due to racism just like this woman can't actually back up their statements either. |
It's a bold statement, her being a plant. More a theory?
You could have called her; bias, attention seeking, trying to mimic Chris Sutton (in levels of boneness), goading, or just wrong.
I have no evidence to prove any of my assertions. No doubt Herbi and Koont will ask. |  |
| Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
| | Poll: | Best Blackpool goal |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:17 - Jan 22 with 2239 views | Herbivore |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:09 - Jan 22 by hampstead_blue |
It's a bold statement, her being a plant. More a theory?
You could have called her; bias, attention seeking, trying to mimic Chris Sutton (in levels of boneness), goading, or just wrong.
I have no evidence to prove any of my assertions. No doubt Herbi and Koont will ask. |
Nah, there's no point. You're a lost cause. | |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:26 - Jan 22 with 2233 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 07:35 - Jan 22 by eireblue |
The press were accused by racism when they were engaged as well.
Harry complained about the coverage straight away.
So the negative coverage has been fairly consistent. |
I’m reminded of these two threads and some of the bizarre responses to somebody portraying the child of a POC mother as a chimpanzee.
The second thread in particular is a perfect snapshot of TWTD.
Danny Baker sacked from 5 Live by itfcjoe 9 May 2019 10:37These things are just mad, he's made a mistake, deleted the offending tweet as soon as pointed out to him and offered a full apology instantly and explained he wasn't aware.
I'd hate to be in the public eye in anyway, must be torturous
[Post edited 22 Jan 2020 8:36]
|  |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:31 - Jan 22 with 2229 views | eireblue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:09 - Jan 22 by hampstead_blue |
It's a bold statement, her being a plant. More a theory?
You could have called her; bias, attention seeking, trying to mimic Chris Sutton (in levels of boneness), goading, or just wrong.
I have no evidence to prove any of my assertions. No doubt Herbi and Koont will ask. |
Interesting.
You have I believe, shared your opinion on antisemitism debates.
I think you have been broadly against people being antisemitic.
It was Jewish people that defined what antisemitism was, as is their right.
So a black women trying to make a point about racism in a debate about racism against a black women, is bias and attention seeking?
Would you suggest GB is biased, attention seeking, goading or just wrong? [Post edited 22 Jan 2020 8:51]
| | | |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:37 - Jan 22 with 2217 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:31 - Jan 22 by eireblue |
Interesting.
You have I believe, shared your opinion on antisemitism debates.
I think you have been broadly against people being antisemitic.
It was Jewish people that defined what antisemitism was, as is their right.
So a black women trying to make a point about racism in a debate about racism against a black women, is bias and attention seeking?
Would you suggest GB is biased, attention seeking, goading or just wrong? [Post edited 22 Jan 2020 8:51]
|
It’s antisemitic. Not anti-Semitic. | |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:54 - Jan 22 with 2199 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
Well it worked.....currently having a love in with Piers Morgan! |  |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:59 - Jan 22 with 2190 views | GlasgowBlue |
No need to apologise. The IHRA article is very clear and informative isn’t it?
It basically shoots down idiots like facey who used to post on here that “arabs are semites so anti-Semitism isn’t exclusively anti Jewish racism” | |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 09:37 - Jan 22 with 2154 views | Oxford_Blue |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 07:49 - Jan 22 by eireblue |
You are misrepresenting. The transcript is available.
What is amusing about your point is a reference to evidence.
Later in that discussion we be buzzfeed article was raised. Lawrence hadn’t seen it.
So the one person self acknowledged as speaking from ignorance to n the topic being raised was Lawrence.
I wonder if you agree with the principle that it is the target of abuse, not the abuser, that gets to decide what is abuse or racist.
[Post edited 22 Jan 2020 7:59]
|
I just don’t agree with you.
In the context of disagreeing with someone’s point of view, why is it acceptable to argue that their race and gender are relevant?
If this had been said to a black, jeiwish or Islamic person, all hell would have broken loose. But it’s open season on safe targets like white men, especially if they are “privileged”. | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 10:26 - Jan 22 with 2118 views | Herbivore |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 09:37 - Jan 22 by Oxford_Blue |
I just don’t agree with you.
In the context of disagreeing with someone’s point of view, why is it acceptable to argue that their race and gender are relevant?
If this had been said to a black, jeiwish or Islamic person, all hell would have broken loose. But it’s open season on safe targets like white men, especially if they are “privileged”. |
Okay boomer. | |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 12:07 - Jan 22 with 2092 views | Enigma_Blue |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 07:49 - Jan 22 by eireblue |
You are misrepresenting. The transcript is available.
What is amusing about your point is a reference to evidence.
Later in that discussion we be buzzfeed article was raised. Lawrence hadn’t seen it.
So the one person self acknowledged as speaking from ignorance to n the topic being raised was Lawrence.
I wonder if you agree with the principle that it is the target of abuse, not the abuser, that gets to decide what is abuse or racist.
[Post edited 22 Jan 2020 7:59]
|
'I wonder if you agree with the principle that it is the target of abuse, not the abuser that gets to decide what is abuse or racist.'
I would say it is more criticism of Meghan Markle by the press & some of the public rather than actual abuse. There is a difference between the two.
By your logic then no one should then have a problem with Laurence Fox claiming the woman in the audience was being racist when she called him ' a privileged White male' | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 12:10 - Jan 22 with 2085 views | Ryorry |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 09:37 - Jan 22 by Oxford_Blue |
I just don’t agree with you.
In the context of disagreeing with someone’s point of view, why is it acceptable to argue that their race and gender are relevant?
If this had been said to a black, jeiwish or Islamic person, all hell would have broken loose. But it’s open season on safe targets like white men, especially if they are “privileged”. |
Sorry, but you're a prime example of not understanding, in exactly the same way that L. Fox didn't.
You need to have an open mind to understand. |  |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 12:13 - Jan 22 with 2071 views | Ryorry |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 08:26 - Jan 22 by GlasgowBlue |
I’m reminded of these two threads and some of the bizarre responses to somebody portraying the child of a POC mother as a chimpanzee.
The second thread in particular is a perfect snapshot of TWTD.
Danny Baker sacked from 5 Live by itfcjoe 9 May 2019 10:37These things are just mad, he's made a mistake, deleted the offending tweet as soon as pointed out to him and offered a full apology instantly and explained he wasn't aware.
I'd hate to be in the public eye in anyway, must be torturous
[Post edited 22 Jan 2020 8:36]
|
Second one's 17 pages!! Any chance of a summary? | |
| |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 14:12 - Jan 22 with 2031 views | Enigma_Blue |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 07:35 - Jan 22 by eireblue |
The press were accused by racism when they were engaged as well.
Harry complained about the coverage straight away.
So the negative coverage has been fairly consistent. |
Yes Harry stated there were racist undertones to some of the criticism Meghan had received, but this is not fact it is just his belief. The problem is the woke in society then jumped on the bandwagon.
Racism is abhorrent and it should be exposed and challenged whenever it is blatant & obvious. However there are some people in society who just see racism & bigotry everywhere & in everything, like Chakrabarti. Well she sees it everywhere apart from the one place she was asked to find it and where it clearly existed, The Labour party! And for her antisemitism whitewash she was rewarded with a peerage. [Post edited 22 Jan 2020 14:20]
| | | |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 14:18 - Jan 22 with 2022 views | Lord_Lucan |
| Have we covered white privilege man Laurence Fox? on 14:12 - Jan 22 by Enigma_Blue |
Yes Harry stated there were racist undertones to some of the criticism Meghan had received, but this is not fact it is just his belief. The problem is the woke in society then jumped on the bandwagon.
Racism is abhorrent and it should be exposed and challenged whenever it is blatant & obvious. However there are some people in society who just see racism & bigotry everywhere & in everything, like Chakrabarti. Well she sees it everywhere apart from the one place she was asked to find it and where it clearly existed, The Labour party! And for her antisemitism whitewash she was rewarded with a peerage. [Post edited 22 Jan 2020 14:20]
|
I haven't read the thread but am I to understand that it is being suggested that Meghan is the victim of racist abuse from the press - or that she is being criticised because she is black.
If so I wondered how long this would take and I'm calling it as bollox.
Harry and Meg have lost the plot.
Fergie had more criticism than most and that wasn't because she is a ginger but that she is also a fruit loop. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
