Sharon Osbourne Self Exposed Being Racist

[xoxo Craig 55,649]

1 hour ago, OMonster said:

He didn't defend the racist comments - he questioned whether the comments were racist. 

1) It's been confirmed that Archie wasn't not made a prince because of his skin colour/ethnicity 

2) There was a conversation about Archie's skin colour. A conversation about skin colour is not inherently racist. It could be, obviously, but asking about a person's skin colour is not automatically racist. People can ask about all sorts of things without talking badly of it. 

Piers did clarify that if a member of the Royal Family (or anyone, for that matter) expressed CONCERN at the potential colour of Archie's skin, that would be racist. He is right. 

The main fall-out surrounding Piers is that he said he doesn't believe Meghan's accounts. A lot of people are saying that is racist, but there is no evidence to suggest that's the case. If Piers doesn't believe Meghan because she is black, then yes, that is clearly racist. But he has said countlessly that his views are not based on the colour of Meghan's skin - it's because he doesn't like her or how she has been perceived to behave. 

He has not been racist in any way. 

I think it is dangerous territory if a victim of racism cannot be criticised for other things, unrelated to their race. 

I do not deny that Meghan has been subjected to some racism, but that doesn't mean people aren't allowed to express a negative opinion about her that isn't racist. And not every negative opinion about a black or ethnic person is racist. 

He did defend them actually. He said that it was disgusting that someone would say that about the royal family. He defended their comments by suggesting that it was out of curiosity. 

1) Its neither been confirmed nor denied that it was over his skin colour. The Monarchy can say whatever tf they want to say, but you have to question the motives behind it. It's clear that they didn't want him to have a title because they didn't want someone of colour to hold something like that. If not his skin colour, why then? You've got to read the room

2) There were CONCERNS over Archie's skin colour. That's a very different scenario than just talking about wether he'll look more like his father or mother. Concerns. They had concerns that the child (which hadn't been born yet at that time) was going to have dark skin. That's racist by all definitions. 

 

The main fall out (Piers) is because he continues to dismiss a person of colour's claims against the royal family (which obviously he loves), and the dismissal of her mental health issues. He said she was lying. How can a white person say that someone of colour didn't experience racism? We have no such right. When you add in the fact that ITV (the broadcasting channel he worked for) is currently running a mental health campaign. You do the maths.

Piers has absolutely been racist. As well as misogynistic, and a toxic person to have on TV. Its not hard to admit that the Royal Family is racist, nor is it hard to admit that Piers has been racist in his actions, attitude, and his words. 

[OMonster 14,675]

2 minutes ago, PunkTheFunk said:

No it hasn't. The rules of who can and can't be a prince can easily be changed. Why weren't they changed for Archie, knowing full well that he has an increased risk level attached to him as the son of Harry and Meghan?

It has been confirmed it wasn't because of his skin colour, although there is really no objective way to measure that, I understand. 

The reason for the change in rules, again, cannot be objectively measured. 

We don't know, for sure, if it is or isn't because of racism. 

My point is that there is no evidence to suggest the Royal Family (or Piers Morgan...) have been racist. 

I find it uncomfortable to accept subjective 'truths' as objective facts without any due diligence at all to verify those truths/fact. 

[OMonster 14,675]

10 minutes ago, xoxo Craig said:

He did defend them actually. He said that it was disgusting that someone would say that about the royal family. He defended their comments by suggesting that it was out of curiosity. 

1) Its neither been confirmed nor denied that it was over his skin colour. The Monarchy can say whatever tf they want to say, but you have to question the motives behind it. It's clear that they didn't want him to have a title because they didn't want someone of colour to hold something like that. If not his skin colour, why then? You've got to read the room

2) There were CONCERS over Archie's skin colour. That's a very different scenario than just talking about wether he'll look more like his father or mother. Concerns. They had concerns that the child (which hadn't been born yet at that time) wad going to have dark skin. That's racist by all definitions. 

 

The main fall out (Piers) is because he continues to dismiss a person of colour's claims against the royal family (which obviously he loves), and the dismissal of her mental health issues. He said she was lying. How can a white person say that someone of colour didn't experience racism? We have no such right. When you add in the fact that ITV (the broadcasting channel he worked for) is currently running a mental health campaign. You do the maths.

Piers has absolutely been racist. As well as misogynistic, and a toxic person to have on TV. Its not hard to admit that the Royal Family is racist, nor is it hard to admit that Piers has been racist in his actions, attitude, and his words. 

I don't deny that Piers is a misogynist. But he hasn't been racist. It isn't racist to not believe a black person's opinion. It would be racist to say that racism is not racism - but he hasn't said that. He has said that what has been presented as racism is not racist, which - based on the only evidence we have - is, so far, true. 

We don't know if it was racism that motivated the decisions made in the royal institution. We just don't know that. 

I am not saying there is no possibility these decisions were motivated by racism. But we simply don't know. 

A black person cannot say that any negative opinion or decision made about them is racist. 

There are multiple sides to this story. We don't know the facts. We don't know if the institution had other reasons to make the decisions they did, unrelated to her race. We know, for example, that Meghan has been reported to bully her staff. We don't know how that influenced the dynamic, moving forwards. 

The bottomline is that we don't know if Meghan was subject to racism in the Royal household. And that was essentially Piers' point. He was wrong to not believe her about mental health because that is a very internal struggle, and can only be verified by one person. But for racism to exist, there needs to be an external cause for it... and there is no way to determine if that existed until someone comes out and says 'yes, X person was racist". 

[OMonster 14,675]

23 minutes ago, Married the Night said:

You don’t get it.
 

White people haven’t experienced the level of racism black people have. So much so that sometimes when we see racism we don’t recognize that is is racist. So when a black woman tells you it’s racist, that’s what it is. As a white person, won’t don’t have the privilege to erase or question their perception. 

Also, this isn’t one person saying it’s racist. Thousands agree. 
 

Being concerned a child’s skin color is too dark for your liking is racist. I understand a lot of people love the Royals and they want to defend them but when you defend them, that makes you racist. 
 

Piers is racist. And you defending this makes you racist, too. And you are so privileged that you can’t even see that. 
 

Before commenting, take a step back and think about it. Because this conversation is over. 

I'm not a fan of the Royals or a fan of Piers. 

I just think it's wrong to say that it is racist to challenge a black person's view of racism. 

Not everything negative a black person is subject to is racist. 

[xoxo Craig 55,649]

1 minute ago, OMonster said:

I don't deny that Piers is a misogynist. But he hasn't been racist. It isn't racist to not believe a black person's opinion. It would be racist to say that racism is not racism - but he hasn't said that. He has said that what has been presented as racism is not racist, which - based on the only evidence we have - is, so far, true. 

We don't know if it was racism that motivated the decisions made in the royal institution. We just don't know that. 

I am not saying there is no possibility these decisions were motivated by racism. But we simply don't know. 

A black person cannot say that any negative opinion or decision made about them is racist. 

There are multiple sides to this story. We don't know the facts. We don't know if the institution had other reasons to make the decisions they did, unrelated to her race. We know, for example, that Meghan has been reported to bully her staff. We don't know how that influenced the dynamic, moving forwards. 

The bottomline is that we don't know if Meghan was subject to racism in the Royal household. And that was essentially Piers' point. He was wrong to not believe her about mental health because that is a very internal struggle, and can only be verified by one person. But for racism to exist, there needs to be an external cause for it... and there is no way to determine if that existed until someone comes out and says 'yes, X person was racist". 

Denying that someone has had a racist experience is racist. Telling someone of colour that you don’t believe they experienced racism (because you believe that institution isn't racist) is racist. Piers Morgan has been racist. 

The bottomline here is that when a person of colour has came out and said "I've experienced racism", you listen. You don't defend the person(s) that are accused, you don’t tell them that they are lying, you don’t get offended by the accusation because you felt that somehow saying the royal family is racist is an attack on you -  you listen. To go on a rant and say that she's lying about her experience is racist. 

Yes there are two sided to every story. But would you rather believe a deep rooted, racist, institution like the Royal Family... or a woman of colour who bravely sat with her husband and opened up about her racism experience? Harry wasn't lying either... he left blanks and its clear he still loves them. But that couple was telling the truth. You could tell by their actions, their words, and how genuine they were. 

[OMonster 14,675]

30 minutes ago, xoxo Craig said:

Denying that someone has had a racist experience is racist. Telling someone of colour that you don’t believe they experienced racism (because you believe that institution isn't racist) is racist. Piers Morgan has been racist. 

The bottomline here is that when a person of colour has came out and said "I've experienced racism", you listen. You don't defend the person(s) that are accused, you don’t tell them that they are lying, you don’t get offended by the accusation because you felt that somehow saying the royal family is racist is an attack on you -  you listen. To go on a rant and say that she's lying about her experience is racist. 

Yes there are two sided to every story. But would you rather believe a deep rooted, racist, institution like the Royal Family... or a woman of colour who bravely sat with her husband and opened up about her racism experience? Harry wasn't lying either... he left blanks and its clear he still loves them. But that couple was telling the truth. You could tell by their actions, their words, and how genuine they were. 

I've never said you shouldn't listen to someone when they share their experience of racism. Ever. Of course you should listen. But you should also afford the accused the right to reply and defend themselves. Not every perceived racist comment is racist. That's just a fact and that's why I will not jump on the bandwagon and call anyone racist until more details are shared. 

[Anderson123 38,489]

Omg that Kelly video.  The other women were trying to save the situation but she said what she said.

[NCgaga 4,324]

3 hours ago, Married the Night said:

Questioning a black woman’s perception of what racism is...is racist. We do not get to have that privilege. End of discussion.

[NCgaga 4,324]

3 hours ago, Married the Night said:

Questioning a black woman’s perception of what racism is...is racist. We do not get to have that privilege. End of discussion.

Umm, no. That’s not how this works. You don’t get to change the perception of how people process thoughts, actions, ideas. We as a society do not get to set those rules. Anyone has the right to question the perception of another human being. The important part of questioning perception is the gathering of facts for an argument. For example: a woman says a man rapes her. We can’t immediately say he is a Rapist until there are facts for a case against him. A black woman calls a whites man a racist. Ok, but we still have a right to look into why she feels that way, and if there is any VALIDITY to the claims. 
 

What is with this over-censoring dumbing down mindset here?