Laurence Fox

[Fubsy]

I really don't see how making the world a place where people are treated in particular ways, based on the colour of ones skin or other identity characteristic is progressive.

It's regressive and is causing division. Is that the goal? Label the two sides, then let them go at each other. Who profits?

 

[Tony Edwards]

The part where everyone is a racist.

The reality is the only racist in this thread, is you.

Ive never said everyone is a racist.

 

[Zatoichi.uK]

The sad thing is, Lawrence Fox really isn't a racist. I expect he abhors racism. Some however will insist that ANY criticism of things like black history month, BLM etc. can only be because of racist intent. To take something fairly benign @Tony Edwards. Do you think it's reasonable to criticise a specific aim of BLM such as the "disruption of the western nuclear family?" This is something that BLM have recently taken down from their website as (I expect) it made them less palatable to the public, but is still a core belief of theirs.

We know that statistically, children raised without fathers are far more likely to go on to commit crime, belong to a gang, end up in prison etc. and have huge negative consequences generally. I understand that 95% of men across all groups in prison in the USA have no relationship with their father. We also know that fatherless homes are most prevalent within the black community for whatever reason. This SHOULD be a problem we want to fix. BLM however seem to be pushing the opposite idea and that "communities" will raise children collectively and that fathers are simply not needed.

Can this be criticised? Can solutions be offered? Or is any weighing in on this topic always driven by racism?

 

[Quartz]

Do you think it's reasonable to criticise a specific aim of BLM such as the "disruption of the western nuclear family?" This is something that BLM have recently taken down from their website as (I expect) it made them less palatable to the public, but is still a core belief of theirs.

BLM (and AF) got taken over by the hard Left.

 

[stockhausen]

The sad thing is, Lawrence Fox really isn't a racist. . . .

Why do you find this sad?
Would you feel happier if he said that he is a racist?

. . . I expect he abhors racism. . . .

On what exactly do you base this "expectation"?
Are you a good friend of his?

 

[Zatoichi.uK]

Why do you find this sad?
Would you feel happier if he said that he is a racist?
On what exactly do you base this "expectation"?
Are you a good friend of his?

I find it sad that criticism of Megan Markle or a strange supermarket policy lands someone with the label of racist. This is a terribly low standard of evidence.

I've listened to enough of him now to have a fairly good handle on his views and haven't heard him say anything remotely racist. I'm open to being persuaded though. What is the single best piece of evidence you can provide to support the claim that he is? Or is it just a feeling you have?

 

[Terminal_Boy]

BLM (and AF) got taken over by the hard Left.

Both were hard left from the get go.

 

[Theophany]

Both were hard left from the get go.

Not emptyquoting!

 

[Terminal_Boy]

Not emptyquoting!

U wot m8?

 

[Theophany]

U wot m8?

I was agreeing with you!

 

[Tony Edwards]

To take something fairly benign @Tony Edwards. Do you think it's reasonable to criticise a specific aim of BLM such as the "disruption of the western nuclear family?"

Im not really sure what you mean by reasonable. I mean you can critices what you want I suppose without it being racist. As long as you dont follow it with a watered down version of 'look what these uppity ******* are up to now'.

We know that statistically, children raised without fathers are far more likely to go on to commit crime, belong to a gang, end up in prison etc. and have huge negative consequences generally. I understand that 95% of men across all groups in prison in the USA have no relationship with their father. We also know that fatherless homes are most prevalent within the black community for whatever reason. This SHOULD be a problem we want to fix. BLM however seem to be pushing the opposite idea and that "communities" will raise children collectively and that fathers are simply not needed.

Can this be criticised? Can solutions be offered? Or is any weighing in on this topic always driven by racism?

Its not really just a black thing is it? I have no problem with 'communities' as such.

All those things you atribute to children being fatherless are also commited by children with fathers. Id hazard a guess and say the reason they might be saying or doing it is to raise children without violence as most violence is commited by men.

If Im honest Im not much of a fan of 'men' as a concept of the best thing for raising kids as I have seen and know some utterly useless fathers, from childhood to now.

 

[Tony Edwards]

I really don't see how making the world a place where people are treated in particular ways, based on the colour of ones skin or other identity characteristic is progressive.

It's regressive and is causing division. Is that the goal? Label the two sides, then let them go at each other. Who profits?

Well BLM (for instance) arguement is that that is what is negatively happening to black people now/already and through history.

Have you not bothered to read up on what the message is? I think what is happening now with a lot of 'white' people is they havent bothered to listen so have not tried to understand the complaints and have gone overly defensive.

A lot of the complaints could be solved with more funding for poorer communities of all colours/races. America has it much worse than the UK though.

Brexit is a verly likely a result of massive underfunding for poorer areas of the UK.

 

[Zatoichi.uK]

Im not really sure what you mean by reasonable. I mean you can critices what you want I suppose without it being racist. As long as you dont follow it with a watered down version of 'look what these uppity ******* are up to now'.

I ask because this is what you have attributed to Lawrence Fox. Can you agree that he has said no such thing? If not can you provide an example of where he has?

Its not really just a black thing is it? I have no problem with 'communities' as such.

I've never suggested it was exclusively a black issue. Even in my post I pointed out that 95% of men in prison in the USA have no relationship with their father, regardless of race.

All those things you atribute to children being fatherless are also commited by children with fathers. Id hazard a guess and say the reason they might be saying or doing it is to raise children without violence as most violence is commited by men.

Again your first point is true. My point was that a disproportionate amount of black kids grow up without fathers. Its not an all or nothing point. Obama even recognised and talked about this in his fathers day speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj1hCDjwG6M

If Im honest Im not much of a fan of 'men' as a concept of the best thing for raising kids as I have seen and know some utterly useless fathers, from childhood to now.

The stats are clear on this. Children who grow up without fathers suffer many negative consequences. Yes of course there are useless fathers, but overall its almost always better to have them in the home.

 

[Hades]

If Im honest Im not much of a fan of 'men' as a concept of the best thing for raising kids as I have seen and know some utterly useless fathers, from childhood to now.

I'd say it's the other way around. Children, particularly boys, need a father figure. I'd extend it to say that kids need both a mother and a father. While sounding like an old fart I think the Victorians were onto something when it was socially unacceptable to raise a child without two parents.

Now my son is a teenager I can see how my petite wife would have little chance controlling him (he's bigger and stronger than me already). It also worries me that some young men will not have a male role model in their life; fewer men are going into teaching for example (because working with children is now seen as a risky career for a man to go into). So young men turn to their peers for that guidance, resulting in young men learning from other young men.

Yes some fathers are crap and shouldn't be in their childs life. But as a society we seem to have dismissed the value of older men on shaping future generations.

 

[joey1211]

Now my son is a teenager I can see how my petite wife would have little chance controlling him

If you're having to apply physcial force to your teenage son to get him to behave, something went wrong a long time ago.

 

[Hades]

If you're having to apply physcial force to your teenage son to get him to behave, something went wrong a long time ago.

And here comes the internet judgemental assumption crowd... I am not talking about physical force. Both my kids are incredibly well behaved. I have never used force on them.

What I am saying is that he's a strapping great kid now. If he wanted to (which he doesn't), then he could simply ignore what my wife says and there is not much she could do about it. My kids are fantastically behaved because we make sure they are. But put someone his size and someone my wife's size into another situation such as a single parent, inner city, deprived area, and I can see how much value a strong father figure offers.

But nowadays we are being told that masculinity is a bad thing. It's not.

 

[chroniclard]

But nowadays we are being told that masculinity is a bad thing. It's not.

Are we?

 

[robgmun]

Are we?

Since the #gamergate and #metoo, it's been a constant drum-beat throughout social media and MSM. So yeah, we need to counter the feminazis and tell our boys it's ok to be a man and just not be a dick about it by being respectful

 

[Lord-Jaffa]

If you're having to apply physcial force to your teenage son to get him to behave, something went wrong a long time ago.

If that is what you took from what he said then i'm sorry to tell you this, but you are an absolute fool.

 

[stockhausen]

If you're having to apply physical force to your teenage son . . .

Is there some suggestion now that Laurence Fox has had to "apply physical force to his teenage son"?

If not, what has this fascinating insight got to do with him?