Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Tony.London Suburbs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > so you think all black men run fast (and no

> white

> > do) and all black men are poor at swimming (and

> no

> > white men are)

> .....Co-incidently pk I have just answered that on

> my next "Dancing?" Point!

> By The Way if you disagree roughly half the 100

>

you're answer seems to be that "relating to one thing and not others" means the same as "as a group with exceptions" and i don't think that that's true (when using the words to mean when that actually mean)

I'll tell you a true story pk..In around 1977 I met a Girl(around 20) at work called Linda..I said Black Guys(as a group) are obviously better dancers.She(fresh from Winchester to London) saod NO!(Having met probably seen 5 Black Guys in her whole life).I said to her "if I meet you in 10 years you will have changed your tune"..Well I met her 20 years later and reminded her...she laughed and said "No Contest!"..B)

Isn't the point that you shouldn't make an assumption about an individual just because they happen to belong to a particular group?


On average women might be less strong than men, but that doesn't mean that you can't be a woman who can lift heavy weights. For example.


Nobody (I think) is suggesting that there aren't characteristics which are associated with members of a particular group as a whole - that's where stereotypes come from in the first place, after all.


But don't mind me - I've got no idea where this thread is going now, and some of the previous comments have left me gobsmacked :-S

pk:To avoid any ambuiguity I'm saying that based on my 54 years experience its BLATANTLY obvious to me that certain Groups(as a whole) have certain attributes...The White Guys that I have seen who can "bust a move" are the "exceptions" to the White mass,sadlyB)..the Black Guys who can not dance well and with "natural" rhythm are very much a minority.Thats just one example in what I am saying.

Naturally one has an open mind and takes EVERYONE on their individual merits but I have lived my life over the decades by clearly noting differences between Men(as a Group) and Women(as a Group)..as another example of "stereotyping"...

Tony.London Suburbs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'll tell you a true story pk..In around 1977 I

> met a Girl(around 20) at work called Linda..I said

> Black Guys(as a group) are obviously better

> dancers.She(fresh from Winchester to London) saod

> NO!(Having met probably seen 5 Black Guys in her

> whole life).I said to her "if I meet you in 10

> years you will have changed your tune"..Well I met

> her 20 years later and reminded her...she laughed

> and said "No Contest!"..B)


so linda thought black men weren't better dancers and then 20 years later she thought otherwise, and then what?

Funnily enough Sue I have just covered your point.Naturally everyone should be looked at as an individual and its essential to have an open positive mind about everyone.That des not however stop me from noting that as a Group there ARE differences between Men and Women,for example.
Natural rhythm eh Tony? White men won the 100m in 72 and 80. And the 200 in 68, 2000. More besides. And what of the middle distances? Coe, Ovett used to dominate; then north africans; before them Finns and Czechs. What does this say of racial traits? Chuff all. The notion of race is biolgically meaningless.

Tony.London Suburbs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Funnily enough Sue I have just covered your

> point.Naturally everyone should be looked at as an

> individual and its essential to have an open

> positive mind about everyone.That des not however

> stop me from noting that as a Group there ARE

> differences between Men and Women,for example.


has anyone suggested that you shouldn't note actual differences between groups where they exist (as a whole, with exceptions)?

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Tony.London Suburbs Wrote:.She(fresh from Winchester to London)

> > so linda thought black men weren't better dancers

> and then 20 years later she thought otherwise, and

> then what?

.....The significance pk was the first comment above..1970's Winchester(and probably even now) was NOT Multi-Racial so she just based her view NOT on observation or perception or First-Hand experience over a long period BUT on an idealistic,simplistic view that we are "all the same"..THEN she acquired 20 years of "Observation/Perception/Experience" and "miraculously".forgive me:)) she formed a completely different view...The first was "rose-tinted" idealogy the second,final view was pragmatic! THATS "then what!"..B)

taper Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Natural rhythm eh Tony? White men won the 100m in

> 72 and 80. And the 200 in 68, 2000. More

> besides. And what of the middle distances? Coe,

> Ovett used to dominate; then north africans;

> before them Finns and Czechs. What does this say

> of racial traits? Chuff all. The notion of race

> is biolgically meaningless.

.....taper:You can NOT seriously believe that!...I KNOW Alan Wells won it..I'm an old ++++ who saw his first Olympics in Tokyo,1964...I did NOT say it was "impossible" for White Guys to Win the "sprints"..empthsis on the "sprints"..I vividly recall the halcyon days of Coe/Cram/Ovett the Middle-Distance English Triumverate!...doesn't that show you something?..That were experts at Middle Distance NOT sprints...The Kenyans/Ethopians had a massive advantage because of the "Altitude"...not that I've got an "Altitude" problem:))

taper:To continue for a moment..If you went into ANY Inner London School where there were 50% Black and 50% White Children and every child had to Race the 100 Metres and,say,there were 100 kids a year with The Winner earning 100 Points down to the last kid gaining one point.If you tallied up EVERY School in Inner London I'm absolutely certain that "as a Group" the Black kids would Win the 100 Metres every time with no exceptions...however if the Race was run over a Mile then the results would be much closer,to say the least.

Do you agree?(tu) or (td)

So black men dance better, jews are more likely to be circumcised, Spaniards* are more likely to live with their parents until a late age...blah blah blah.

Any of this going anywhere?


Fact remains Shu and Mrs Shu were upset by a remark and I think justifiably so.

The comment almost certainly came from ignorance and crassness rather than out and out racism (and I'm pretty sure the bloke knew it would have been irksome rather than charming**) but so what, a bit of decency costs nothing.


* An old Spanish joke goes, "how do you know Jesus was a Spaniard? He lived with his mum until he was 34."

**I'm inclined to agree that "Yo, Sushi" (a la Bush to Blair perhaps) would have at least had some sort of proto-wit about it

Different population groups are clearly physically distinct, shaped by natural selection to suit their particular environments. But physical differences between human groups does not mean these differences can be reduced to racial distinctions, and certainly not skin colour. Apart from dancing and sprinting, what other traits do you put down to skin colour Tony?

You confuse me, Taper. Can you clarify the difference between "population groups" and racial groups in your statement?


You see, this is the kind of thing that really annoys me... refusing outright to recognise that top sprinters tend to be from African heritage... absurd. Naive, faux political correctness.

I'm not sure race always plays such a significant part in sporting achievements. I think background and circumstances also contributes a lot. For example, back in the forties and fifties many world class boxers were Italian American. This was because they came from very poor blue collar backgrounds. As time went by Italians became more succesful in American society and less of them got into boxing. They were replaced by black american boxers. This was simply because many of these boxers came from the ghetto. A similar argument could be applied to tennis, which is a predominantly white sport and has been for many years. This is because it's a middle class sport and not played in poor neighbourhoods.I'm sure many people ten years ago would have said black people couldn't play it and that white people were superior at this particular sport. However, the Williams sisters blew this argument out of the water. Harry Redknapp recently said that young black players were doing better then what he called 'lazy white boys'. It was a remarkable comment to make considering this is the sort of criticism that is usually reserved by some for black footballers (Ron Atkinson). What Redknapp said was that the black players worked harder and wanted it more. This doesn't mean they were physically superior, just that they had a better attitude. I think he was mainly referring to African players, who tend to come from extremely poor backgrounds. With regards to sprinting, the current number 1 british sprinter is a young white guy named Craig Pickering.

Tony.London Suburbs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> taper:To continue for a moment..If you went into

> ANY Inner London School where there were 50% Black

> and 50% White Children and every child had to Race

> the 100 Metres and,say,there were 100 kids a year

> with The Winner earning 100 Points down to the

> last kid gaining one point.If you tallied up EVERY

> School in Inner London I'm absolutely certain that

> "as a Group" the Black kids would Win the 100

> Metres every time with no exceptions...however if

> the Race was run over a Mile then the results

> would be much closer,to say the least.

> Do you agree?(tu) or (td)


Tony, in my years of experience in Inner London schools one thing that I have learnt is that analysing any apparent difference between an individual's performance (sporting, social or academic) by their race is at best simplistic and at worst dangerous. I am not being painfully PC in saying this, it is based on my daily dealings with young people over the years.


Going back to the original post, the habit that some people have of shouting their unasked for opinions or greetings in the street is truly offensive and quite common. It is interesting that I only get things said to me when I am walking on my own, and never when I am with my partner. If anyone has a good idea for something to say back to these mindless, ill-mannered idiots, I would be delighted to try it and report back on its efficacy.

coachkelly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> With regards to sprinting, the

> current number 1 british sprinter is a young white

> guy named Craig Pickering.


But the *fastest* british sprinter at the moment is Dwain Chambers. And the fastest british sprinter ever is Linford Christie. The 100m medals at the olympics will probably go to the Bolt, Powell and Gay. Fastest 100m ever, Bolt. Fastest 200m and 400m ever, Johnson.


Of course this is circumstantial, but it certainly looks like a trend worth considering to me.


To be honest I don't really care who the fastest sprinters are, I just don't like the way people are made to feel guilty for suggesting that there may be physical differences between races.

espelli Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If anyone has a good idea for something to say back

> to these mindless, ill-mannered idiots, I would be

> delighted to try it and report back on its

> efficacy.


xxxxxx


Off-topic, but if anyone ever says "cheer up darling" to you, or words to that effect, "my mother's just died actually" usually shuts them up :)

Dwain Chambers is a drugs cheat. This has to be taken into account when considering his times. For the record Britain has had four gold medalists at 100 metres. Reggie Walker, Harold Abrahams, Alan Wells and Linford Christie. 3 of them are white and the only black runner, Linford Christie, was found to be a drugs cheat. Although he wasn't done for taking drugs when he won his gold, I think it's fair to assume he probably was doing it then and was lucky to get away with. So was he a great sprinter because he was black or because he was a drugs cheat? In fact, many of the great sprinters of the past 20 years have been drugs cheats. Ben Johnson, Carl Lewis, Justin Gatlin. They are also black. Could a factor in the dominance of black sprinters also be attributed to the fact that many of them took performance enhancing drugs rather then some physical difference to white sprinters?

coachkelly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Could a factor in the dominance of black

> sprinters also be attributed to the fact that many

> of them took performance enhancing drugs.


I don't think that's really a fair comment, seeing as almost all modern top-flight 100m runners are black. Maybe no top level white 100m runners have been found guilty, simply because there aren't any!! No white man has reached the olympic 100m final since 1980.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Since you’re clearly not experiencing what we are I’m not sure I agree with any of your points. I also asked for anyone else having a similar problem… it’s absolutely fine if you’re not but I’d appreciate less of the “go live your life”. There is no need to comment with that tone, it doesn’t provide us with any help for the matter. Nor is it polite. We’re a very kind family simply not wanting damage and don’t find the actions necessary. It’s been the same driver/delivery for a while and this never used to happen. I wouldn’t post this on the forum if it wasn’t getting so frustrating. Again, the kids and myself have kindly asked for this to stop a few times with no success. We all work hard for our living and would never want (nor are we trying) to rid someone of their livelihood. But similarly, I don’t find it fair. Please feel free to PM me if anyone has any advise or shares the same.  
    • And now we have the worst labour government in many many decades who, by moving to your position on the right, are ushering in a far right reform government. Well done you.
    • You implied he did a good job in your first paragraph when you said you would have hated to see Corbyn lead the country through Covid - the alternative being Johnson, presumably? With the results we all saw. Unite - you have a problem with unions? Who work hard to see that their members get a fair deal in their workplace? How exactly are these people and groups "all as bad as each other"? In what way? Labour "purging their party of the far-left" has given us a weak prime minister who has apparently deserted any "left" (aka caring for other people and having decent moral principles) leanings he ever had. Which is why people appear to be leaving Labour in droves and voting, or intending to vote, Green or Lib Dem or for an independent Left candidate. Starmer has shot himself in the foot, in my opinion. But what would I know. What worked?! I don't know enough about what you are talking about to comment, but "believing" you know the reason someone did something does not make it true. I don't believe that Corbyn ever got "starstruck" or "forgot about his politics", but if you can provide evidence that those things are true, then fair enough. I don't think you can, though.
    • I think you need to get a grip If it's who I am thinking of, she's a young black girl in her twenties, has braids with bright colours through them and - I suspect - works with her father. It's always the same man behind the wheel and he's older than her, always in the same van, so I'm assuming it's a father-daughter combo which, if it is, I think is rather sweet.  They hustle hard in a job that is poorly paid, has little prospects, is relentless and thankless. The fact that they have stuck it out since the pandemic says a lot about them.  I think she's a lovely girl, who's perhaps a little shy - but she'll smile or chat back if you make the effort with her. And I admire her for sticking with that job for so long. Perhaps she's just one of these people who's naturally a bit clumsy or bashes things, the same way some people are heavy on their feet when they walk. But I wouldn't dream of jeopardising her job because she closes the slams the gate and doesn't 'kiss' the ring doorbell with her fingers.  Perhaps she's being passive aggressive because you are. And perhaps she also wishes she got to spend her time worrying about potential damage to her letterbox or her gate.  As for your gate / letterbox - you're talking about hypotheticals. Has there been any damage? No. Then go and live your life and worry about it when it happens.  (apols we have the wrong person, but some of my points still stand). 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...