What does Woke actually mean

I even gave him the context.

That is rubbish as we would have no need for diversity which is seen as a positive thing and promoted as such by governments and equality groups. So you have to have diversity which restricts your pool becasue you have to have a range of peoples. Understanding that different ethnic groups have on average different abilities is the principle that the woke find difficult to understand and regard proportionality as the key to equality.

Yes.

If this were the rationale, diversity wouldn't matter much unless the organisation were exclusively drawing from a minority. It would also matter far more that minorities wee over-represented, than if majorities were

Of course - this isn't the rationale. The happy clappy, church-of-woke rationale is that 'diversity is a strength' in itself - ie the more 'diversity' (in these characteristics), the better, regardless of population pools or representation. This, of course, drives a horse a coaches through the notion that candidates should be chosen regardless of these characteristics, because they don't matter.

Sandy is pointing directly at one of many logical inconsistencies in the stories told about this nonsense. In my view most of it is just motivated by various forms of racial animus

A divisive generational gap is emerging where young students between 18-25 are sceptical of freedom of speech, democracy and tolerance. These young indoctrinated self-loathers prefer censorship and this just about

sums up the view of the Wokerati. Worrying but not surprising:


Critical race theory is being taught as fact

Mention woke indoctrination in schools and most people might imagine something like a pink-haired, nonbinary teacher forcing children to take the knee for Black Lives Matter. If you look on TikTok, you will find no shortage of such teachers gleefully

revealing how they sneak Pride flags, LGBTQ+ books and BLM posters into the classroom. Certainly, there are plenty of activist teachers working in schools, who see pupils as a captive audience. Yet as worrying as such examples may be, they are

merely the tip of the iceberg.


New research conducted for Policy Exchange by author and academic Eric Kaufmann suggests that activist teaching is now extremely widespread in the UK. What’s more, it is beginning to have an impact on the views of young people. Polling for The

Politics of the Culture Wars in Contemporary Britain, published last week, finds that six out of 10 school leavers say they were either taught about ideas associated with critical race theory, or they heard about them from an adult at their school.

These include concepts like white privilege, systemic racism and unconscious bias. Slightly more – 65 per cent – say they either encountered the concept of patriarchy or the idea that there are multiple genders from adults at school.


...These ideas have gained ground precisely because it is not just pink-haired TikTok teachers who are intent on promoting a one-sided, politically motivated view of the world. It is also the academics who write the school curriculum and

textbooks. It is the university educationalists who train each new generation of teachers. It is the journalists and campaigners outside of schools who agitate for their own pet issues to gain a hearing in the classroom. And it is the people who

stock the school library and put together online resources for teachers and children alike. The upshot is that when it comes to English, history, geography and even maths, the curriculum itself has become politicised.


www.spiked-online.com/2022/11/22/critical-race-theory-is-being-taught-as-fact/



Commenting on the report, Dr Samir Shah, a member of the Government’s Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, said: “Views which remain on the fringe in society as a whole, are held by a significant number, or even a majority, by voters

in this age category.



“But what makes the survey disturbing is that these new attitudes challenge the very foundations of liberal thought: free speech, tolerance, debate, and democracy.”



She said that views “taking hold” among young people “run against many Enlightenment values”, leading to a “world in which nuance and tolerance is being replaced by intolerance and a fear of speaking one’s mind”.


www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/19/teach-britain-founded-racism-say-almost-half-young-people-poll/

Sadly Sandy I think you have let your racial prejudices cloud your judgement.  To be clear employers are not allowed to reject people because of their colour skin - whether that skin is white or brown.  That's the law.  All positive action is doing is recognising that if your area has 20% black people but your workforce has 0% black people, it is suggestive that you are fishing in a smaller pond for your new recruits and therefore suggestive that you are not getting the best possible people for your company.  It may not be of course - it may be statistical coincedance, there may be some factor that makes white people in your are more qualified for the jobs than black people or it may be that your workforce is too small for the sample to nbe statistically significant. Positive action just gives you the right to try to address the issue if your company feels it is missing out on the best recruits.  

I am surprised we are having to go over race in TV advertisements again. Its pretty obvious.  An advertiser, lets say Fairy Liquid, has perhaps 30 seconds to sell its product to as many people in the UK that it can.  A typical ad will have perhaps two characters.  They want the viewing public to buy into the characters and their story and hence be like them using the product. To do so the advertiser wants the character to be cheery, approachable, reasonably attractive and as much like the viewers as possible.  If there is one character they will almost invariably by white skinned as they look like most viewers, if there are two characters the second character will often be blackskinned as nothing to be gained by having a second white skinned person and the second black skinned person can subconsciously appear more like them to the ethnic monority audience.  Its not about making political statements - its all about selling bottles of fairy liquid.

TV advertisements are approved by the Companies placing the individual adverts Mags.  They are paying (a lot) for the 30 seconds or so of TV, they get what they want.  Its not done collectively - Fairy Liquid (Proctor and Gamble) decide their ad without discussing with Tesco who might be the next ad to come on or Saga who have the next one.  

P&G design their ad to whatever they think will sell them the most bottles of Fairy Liquid.

They do copious amounts of market research before and afterwards. If P+G concluded that a mixed race couple resulted in lower sales than an all white skinned couple, the next ad would have an all white skinned couple. It really is that simple.