Labour advisor : "You're white and your entire existence is drenched in racism.".

No more necessary than Baggs' musings on Ms Bergdorf's breasts or your attempt to police the thread really jane

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

I hope she does stay in the post as 'advisor' as this will backfire spectacularly on the Labour Party.

So POGS do you not accept that much of our country's wealth is built on the exploitation of other races and other countries? In particular the sugar and slave trade. That there was a real and sustained attempt to paint black people as uncivilised and uneducated. That the policy of extending Christianity to other parts of the world caused much suffering. That is what she means by our society being built on racism.
As far as history goes she is also right. Only recently have the stories of people like Mary Seacole and Frederick Douglass come to light.

Not sure I want to see that photo, Maizie.

That's why I asked the question, because Baggs put in her interpretation that Bergdorf said ALL white people in the UK are irredeemably racist, whereas Bergdorf did not say that at all.
She is equating Andrew Neill's WE with All white people in the UK.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

I can't see anywhere there where she has said ALL white people in the UK are irredeemably racist.
I am sure if she had said that you would have quoted it.
When she said "Y'all" she was talking to white people in America after racist killings in Charlottesville.

www.theguardian.com/global/2017/sep/04/munroe-bergdorf-on-the-loreal-racism-row-it-puzzles-me-that-my-views-are-considered-extreme

Strangely enough, none of the papers I normally look at have a photo of Bergdorf's breasts today.
I wonder why that is.

If you want to see and hear Munroe Bergdorf then can I suggest using BBC I Player and watching BBC 2 program
' This Week' dated 12th October 2017.

Snippets of what she said up to you to watch for the full text.

" We live in a deeply racist society"

"Why should we expect anything less from a country that has built it's success on the enslavement of non - white people? It's that continual cycle of racism that explains where we are now. Why does the UK acknowledge the sacrifice of people killed in wars but not the spilt blood of black people".

" If the UK took our oppression seriously , then people like me who call out racism would be listened to, rather than ridiculed or threatened with death".

" If white people want to see an improvement for people of colour , they need to understand that racism is not learned, it's inherited, and either consciously or unconsciously passed down through privilege "

"The uncomfortable truth is that the WHITE RACE is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on earth"

There followed a reasonable , polite debate between Michael Portillo and Ed Balls with Bergdorf.

Portillo " But you notice in the figures as well, one of the groups that perform very poorly was the white working - class boy they came almost below any category in the entire list. Now that isn't racism presumably is it? There is a Social problem there."

Bergdorf. " That is class."

Portillo " What I am suggesting is you are making a leap from what emerged in these figures to saying that the cause must be victimisation , victimhood must be racist where as some of the elements clearly were not racist they were not."

Education was mentioned.

Bergdorf. " There is an imbalance especially when it comes to education and the whole system needs to change".

Andrew Neil. "Well let's look at the figures on education. 33% of white kids go to university or further education, 37% of black kids go to university or further education, 67 % of Indian kids go to university or further education, 76 % of chinese kids go to university or education". Where's the racism in that?

Bergdorf. " I'm talking about peoples history ". "If black kids are not being taught about their history , if we are taught that white history is paramount, that is essentially feeding into a white supremacist narrative. We can't be teaching kids that white is the default , that white peoples history is the sole history of this country. We need to be taught about black contributions , and contributions of other cultures."

Andrew Neil. "YOU THINK WE ARE IRREDEEMABLY RACIST DON'T YOU?

Bergdorf. " YES , I DO UNFORTUNATELY I DO. I THINK THE SUCCESS OF BRITAIN IS LITERALLY BASED ON RACISM.

It was an interesting discussion and points were raised both understanding her opinion and questioning her opinion .

Why did I post the above?

Because Bergdorf has been given the opportunity to 'state' her opinion on various platforms and she does not shy away from ' stating ' that in her opinion ' ALL ' white people in the UK are ' irredeemably racist ' and the ' white race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on earth".

Bergdorf is an eloquent speaker/debater but I think it is not beyond the wit of man if Shadow women and equalities secretary Dawn Butler considers Bergdorf to be a suitable member to advise on a Labour Party LGBT+ advisory board then obviously comments will be made.

inews.co.uk/opinion/munroe-bergdorf-race-wrong-tory/

About British suffrage. Conservatives did not support it before the first world war.
Emmeline Pankhurst was Labour to start off with, but became Tory after the vote was given to her.

Baggs what would you call this?
To get back to the original post, it is so incomprehensible to put Berghoff in any post in government as she is so rascist and biased, she would be unsettling to say the least in any role
or Annie's post saying Bergdorf needed counselling?
It's prejudice. I could go back further but CARE. There is a general theme on this thread that Bergdorf because. of one or two partial quotes is unfit for the role. That is prejudice.

"Some of the wealthy women who received the vote in 1918 were non-white. As so often when someone in British politics says something exceptionally witless, Bergdorf was talking about American politics, and simply hadn’t bothered to check whether the same applied this side of the Atlantic."

from an article in the i on Thursday.

"Bergdorf has been a longstanding collaborator with Illamasqua. Following the backlash in August, Illamasqua defended her, writing on Twitter: “We don’t stand or accept any form of racism, but we also believe Munroe’s comments have been edited out of context by a certain media title (who we won’t bother naming) without telling a true story.” "

Where does she say she wants to gay bash anyone?
Have you actually read what she says, rather than what others said she said?
Her posts were removed from facebook, but they left the comments on that were said about her posts.
That's wrong, in my opinion.

I think saying you want to "gay bash" someone is pretty close to inciting violence.

I had some unkind thoughts about Bergdorf's picture in the paper this morning. Low décolletage revealing stuck on, rather unconvincing breasts. This wasn't a transphobic thought; I'd have the same thoughts about any obviously false breast enhancements. I prefer natural with all its imperfections and I think the endless striving for supposed physical perfection is a major factor in the reported increasing mental health problems in young women. Young men too but rather less so according to reports.

Ken has never been one of my favourite Labour people and age hasn't improved him in my eyes. However, the LP has always been what used to be called a broad Church.
I don't understand why the Conservative party has included people with views I find abhorrent.
Someone with dual heritage will have a good idea of what it feels like to be discriminated against. Many of our major cities and wealth was built on slavery. I'm proud that so many people in this country campaigned to end slavery but no one can deny it existed and its legacy continues.
We can dislike the way someone expresses their views but she wasn't inciting hatred or saying anything that doesn't have some truth in it.

In answer to" had I read the thread", yes I had. However, I cannot think of any reason the Labour Party would want her or anyone like Ken Livingston in the party. To have them in the first place would indicate they condone their behaviour. That is up to the majority of Labour members who find such views repellent to stand up and be counted and say so. I know we have freedom of speech in this country, but that womans comments were base and disgusting, she obviously hates the lot of us.

www.theguardian.com/global/2017/sep/04/munroe-bergdorf-on-the-loreal-racism-row-it-puzzles-me-that-my-views-are-considered-extreme

You need to read this as well as the OP.

Prejudice towards Bergdorf!? Those examples given in the OP of what she has said suggest prejudice may be emanating from Bergdorf.

Jalima1108 If you take the posts on GN as a typical example it will be bloody difficult. The amount of prejudice exhibited towards Bergdorf is unbelievable. But then I suppose that shows why someone like her is needed.

That's quite a big judgement on to make from words on a page Baggs but I am sorry if it felt like that.

But they were employing them people to advise the LP. To advise you need knowledge of what you are giving advice on which was on LBGT issues. She seems to have all the qualifications needed.

I think so too, annie.

Fair point, GG. I thought the question just seemed a bit snappy and unfriendly is all.

Sometimes an objective, non-prejudicial viewpoint is best when employing someone for a job like this.

It could be difficult to find someone, but there must be people out there who would fit those criteria.