Dumb Bint. Political Elf 'n' Safety Gone Mad etc.

I think to be racist you need to actually be racist - as in not like someone or a group because they look a bit different, which is just silly. If I say '******' I am not racist, as I genuinely don't give a **** if you are brown or not. One of the many reasons I've wandered away from the left is the left is jam packed full of people jumping up and down complaining about apparent manifestations of social ills, such as racism or sexism, without ever stopping to ask if those manifestations are actually caused by that particular social ill. Whenever a scientist tests a theory they look for causation and effect - you take a theory, for instance: 'Poor people are more prone to Alcoholism' - and then you work out if it is being poor that makes you drink, or it is the same thing that makes you prone to alcoholism that makes you poor... causation and effect.

When I see the likes of Toby or some other crackpot leftist say 'there are few black managers, therefore it is Racism' I facepalm and ask for a backup statement to show the correlation, the causation and effect. None are ever forthcoming - they see correlations where it fits a perceived social injustice, they don't bother their arse to test if the other 1,000 variables that could create differences in groups could be the cause of a negative attribute - they just immediately shout 'racism' or 'sexism' or 'poor people being exploited' (who to **** could find any use at all for the typical Jeremy Kyle contestant in order to exploit them?.. could the more logical 'causation and effect' outside of any theory of exploitation not be that they are poor because their intelligence levels are at the lower end of a natural intelligence bell curve!?)

So going back to the OP. My mate has an aunt in Glasgow who is up for an MSP nomination - when telling me the story he had almost a guilty laugh when he said that she was almost guaranteed to be put up, as she was competing against 4 males for the nomination, and Labour needed to get their quota of females up. The perceived social injustice that Labour are trying to fix is a lack of women in politics - the causation and effect is that women for various reasons are discriminated against, so we have to handicap males in order to give women a fair shot. Yet, when handicapping someone because they have testicles we don't even stop to ask what handicaps they had to actually get past to get to where they are... if those handicaps could actually have been harder than those faced by women? For instance, what happens if you are a short bald man, who grew up with a single parent in a slum, who never had a chance at a good education from the **** school your maw put you in, yet you taught yourself well - and you are competing against a middle class woman who went to a private school - did she really face a harder time getting to the nomination stage than you? Is it fixing a social ill by putting her in front of you simply because you have balls? Well that's exactly the scenario that is happening in the UK right now, and Harriet Harman is suggesting we need more of it at every level of society...