The Psyche of UK Sikhs - This can't end well can it ?

[Guest Jagsaw_Puzzled_Singh]

21 hours ago, BhForce said:

OK, these findings are extremely interesting. Do you have a link for your blog so that these findings may be verified?

How could that be? Isn't the system computerized? Or are interviews only given to specific individuals that are approved by humans?

Firstly, after 6 years of telling you guys I write for a living about race and philosophy you find it "interesting" TODAY ????  

Secondly, what kind of would want to openly invite hostile abusers with zero respect and on to  anything he does away from this cyber forum ?

Thirdly, seeing how you seem to want everything under the sun officially "verified" like a sociopathic madman....can you please "verify"  your shoe size, waist size, head circumference, date of birth and proof of British citizenship before I converse with you further ?

Fourthly.....….You have absolutely no idea what the "system" is do you ?    You actually think it's some computer in a room or an entity don't you ?  How old are you BHForce ?  I mean you do realise I said that the white graduate is 3 or 4 times more likely to get an interview than your son because NHS England's own statistics showed that to be the case. Who on earth reads a statistic and decides to have an argument with it ? What is wrong with you BHForce ???

[Premi5]

On 4/3/2019 at 9:36 PM, Big_Tera said:

You are comming across as muslim sympathizer here.

Muslims are the worst people on earth. 

 

 

 

Interesting. 

On 4/5/2019 at 1:18 PM, Guest jigsaw_puzzled_singh said:

"The reason that Jagsaw thinks Muslims are just fine"

^   Basically, BHForce,  most individual human beings are "just fine", be they Hindus, Jews, Sikhs or Muslims. 99% of all humans are just decent folk striving to bring up their own families as best they can. Only 1% are either truly evil or truly saint-level good.....and that's the thing, you need to snap out of this irrational hatred / bigotry  against an entire group of people and understand that a 'system' has got you thinking the way you think. This same 'system' is shafting you up the jacksy whilst simultaneously playing the age old 'divide and rule'  game with your head....planted ideas in your head about who your enemy is so you won't even notice the fact that you're getting shafted by them. I'll give you an example: I did a Freedom of Information request a few weeks ago to NHS England about it's graduate scheme. I asked them a series of questions and this is a very brief summary of their answers:

1) Applicants to the NHS graduate scheme = 58% white - 40% black and ethnic minority (the 2% refused to answer are usually white)

2) On average, the black and ethnic minority applicants had higher academic qualifications

3) Those who made it past the initial sifting stages = 78% white  - 19% black and ethnic minority

 

Now, for my critical race / Philosophy blog I conduct these types of FOI requests and research all the time so the only reason I'm mentioning this one is because they are my latest findings. For instance, last year I found that the majority of Law graduates in this country are now black and ethnic minority (52%) but only 8% of legal jobs go to them. So you see, just using the NHS graduate scheme as an example, as soon as they hit the online form submit button on their computer the young white graduate is 3 to 4 times more likely to get an interview than your son or daughter and these types of negative statistics are prevalent throughout all aspects of life in the UK- from the criminal justice system to the entertainment industry. These state of affairs don't see a difference between your son and Mr Khan's son. To the system they are one and the same. They both get shafted by the system and it gets away with it because the system is good at what it does. it's been perfecting this art for hundreds of years. It's damn good at it. It ensures we start hating each other instead of uniting and taking the system on as a strong collective unit. Unity...is what I'm all about my friend. There is power in unity.

Very interesting.

I think some of it is 'unconscious bias' as explained by research into why whites do a lot better for example in clinical medical exams than non-whites

[dallysingh101]

2 hours ago, Premi5 said:

I think some of it is 'unconscious bias' as explained by research into why whites do a lot better for example in clinical medical exams than non-whites

I think most, if not all of it is conscious bias. It's a deeply rooted structure they have in place to ensure their supremacy and access to the best resources for less work compared to a recent immigrant or the children of such immigrants.    

It's exactly like a caste system but operates quietly and tries not to bring any attention to itself. 

[Premi5]

20 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

I think most, if not all of it is conscious bias. It's a deeply rooted structure they have in place to ensure their supremacy and access to the best resources for less work compared to a recent immigrant or the children of such immigrants.    

It's exactly like a caste system but operates quietly and tries not to bring any attention to itself. 

Not sure you can quantify it exactly as conscious being more than unconscious. I think in the past it definitely was, but a lot of younger professional people of varied backgrounds I know are very anti-racism or discrimination and their actions (working alongside them) speak louder than words.  Other than some selected cases like that Punjabi who was being targetted in that IT office job that was in the news a few months ago, it looks like the bias is now more unconscious. 

People are less nationalistic than in the past, and as you know, nowadays people worry about even being associated with a British or English flag in case it makes them look 'racist'. 

Found this  https://diversity.ucsf.edu/resources/unconscious-bias

 

What is unconscious bias?

Bias is a prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another usually in a way that’s considered to be unfair. Biases may be held by an individual, group, or institution and can have negative or positive consequences.

There are types of biases

1. Conscious bias (also known as explicit bias) and
2. Unconscious bias (also known as implicit bias)

It is important to note that biases, conscious or unconscious, are not limited to ethnicity and race. Though racial bias and discrimination are well documented, biases may exist toward any social group. One’s age, gender, gender identity physical abilities, religion, sexual orientation, weight, and many other characteristics are subject to bias.

Unconscious biases are social stereotypes about certain groups of people that individuals form outside their own conscious awareness. Everyone holds unconscious beliefs about various social and identity groups, and these biases stem from one’s tendency to organize social worlds by categorizing.

Unconscious bias is far more prevalent than conscious prejudice and often incompatible with one’s conscious values. Certain scenarios can activate unconscious attitudes and beliefs. For example, biases may be more prevalent when multi-tasking or working under time pressure.

 

Alternatively, there's this  https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/don-t-shoot-messenger-minorities-are-kept-out-top-jobs-medicine-8180679.html:

 

Don’t shoot the messenger – minorities are kept out of the top jobs in medicine

Last week it was reported that a doctor told students to act less "overtly gay" - but here, Dr Una Coales argues that she simply tells students to adopt behaviour likely to reduce subjective bias.

Una Coales

Thursday 27 September 2012 11:49

Last week, The Independent published a front page report headlined “Senior GP tells doctors to act less gay”. It related to my advice book for doctors on how to pass their Clinical Skills Assessment (CSA) examination interviews. Brief passages from the book, shown by themselves can, of course, look controversial, but when viewed in context they become sensible and necessary pieces of advice.

When I applied for a job in 1994, I was asked: “who is the Captain of the England rugby team?” and “how would you feel as a mother leaving your child at home?” I was unsuccessful. In 1996, I finally got a job at the same hospital. The white male surgeon interviewers were on that occasion thoroughly professional. Organisational culture tends to reflect a top-down attitude. Having difficulty advancing my career, I asked a renowned surgeon to look over my CV. He made one suggestion: delete my maiden name of “Choi”. I did and was called for interview each time. Concurrently, racism in medicine – ie institutional NHS racism – was being exposed. In 1999, Professor Joe Collier blew the whistle in a BMJ article. He had notified the Commission for Racial Equality about computer software that generated a lower score for medical school applicants with non-Caucasian names. As an NHS whistleblower, instead of receiving applause, he was vilified and ostracised.

For me, discrimination in medicine was stomach-churning. Gay people had the added agony of deciding whether to be discreet (or even lie) about their sexuality. In the early 1990s, I had worked in a highly diverse (ethnically and sexually) hospital in New York. The trauma surgery team I belonged to had, at one point, been all female. Our patients, too, were multicultural and open about their sexual orientation.

The greatest barrier to racial and sexual equality is institutional denial. Working in NHS hospitals, I learned the phrase “be a grey man”, which means don’t cause waves, don’t stand out, don’t speak up, turn a blind eye, and keep your head low. The consequence of “talking about the fight club” – in other words, racism, discrimination or selective social engineering was “career suicide”.

When I was first elected to the Council of the Royal College of GPs, I was given similar advice. How strange to be working in such a hostile environment coming from America where an active effort to discriminate positively on behalf of minorities was encouraged and there was zero tolerance of racism and discrimination.

A Kings Fund report, Racism in Medicine, generated powerful debate in 2001 with its finding that bullying and discrimination were a daily fact of life for black and Asian doctors. A BMA survey two years later, revealed that among ethnic minority doctors who form nearly a third of the NHS workforce, more than 80 per cent believed their ethnicity had a negative effect on their career advancement. Dr Clare Gerada, the chair of the RCGP, has herself drawn attention “to the existence of homophobia and biphobia within healthcare”.

 

In 2009, I published a series of articles offering CSA exam revision tips in a medical magazine, and then reprinted the same advice for GPs in a book. Shortly after its initial publication, a RCGP internal study identified the need for enhanced diversity training for examiners and patient actors. This has been implemented and the College continues to make great efforts to minimise bias. It has recently commissioned the King’s Fund to study the poorer exam outcomes of ethnic minorities.

Overt bias has been eliminated from College exams but there is still a risk of subconscious bias. The British Journal of Medical Practitioners 2009 asserted: “As blatant forms of racism become extinguished, unconscious racial biases in subtle forms are appearing. This occurs in people who possess strong egalitarian values, who believe they are not prejudiced, but have negative racial feelings of which they are unaware.”

Subjective bias cannot be eliminated in its entirety. My exam book thus advises doctors on how to adopt behaviour likely to reduce subjective bias; to not draw attention to anything that might distract from a pure appreciation of their medical skills. I am blunt, as many doctors may be in denial about cultural (mis)perceptions. I respect that some feel that to compromise one’s identity is wrong. I make no judgements. My advice has helped hundreds of doctors pass their exams by reducing bias and placing them on an equal footing.

[dallysingh101]

2 hours ago, Premi5 said:

Not sure you can quantify it exactly as conscious being more than unconscious. I think in the past it definitely was, but a lot of younger professional people of varied backgrounds I know are very anti-racism or discrimination and their actions (working alongside them) speak louder than words.  Other than some selected cases like that Punjabi who was being targetted in that IT office job that was in the news a few months ago, it looks like the bias is now more unconscious. 

People are less nationalistic than in the past, and as you know, nowadays people worry about even being associated with a British or English flag in case it makes them look 'racist'. 

Found this  https://diversity.ucsf.edu/resources/unconscious-bias

I think they are playing a sneaky game. Well the vast majority of them. They know exactly what they are doing, or at least what is going on. They know it benefits them. Some bull5hit 'diversity training' is just another way of someone making money, and some tick boxes being filled to make out like they've addressed things. You very rarely (if ever!) change people's deep convictions and cultural moorings through diversity training courses.  And even if they keep the odd harmless token around, it doesn't really prove anything. 

All that's happened is the racism/nationalism has gone underground and operates secretly. I see union jacks and red cross flags all over the place, all the time, so no, they aren't worried about showing it. Plus if you witnessed what vile and lowlife things used to get done by overt racists under these flags, you'd understand why so many people got embarrassed to be seen with them. Imagine if people would conspicuously use a nishaan sahib, pi55 and shyte on people's doorsteps, threaten and intimidate people who couldn't defend themselves, including women and children, attack lone people in packs, spit on people, abuse them, swear at them and much more.  If this was taking place quite frequently, by people 'proudly' rocking the nishaan sahib most of us would be embarrassed to be associated with it. 

 

I think the 'unconscious bias' ones are simply people who can't deal with the ugly reality and go into denial. A lot like some of our fudhoos when it comes to facing the reality of casteism in the panth. 

[Premi5]

On 10/3/2021 at 8:35 PM, dallysingh101 said:

I think they are playing a sneaky game. Well the vast majority of them. They know exactly what they are doing, or at least what is going on. They know it benefits them. Some bull5hit 'diversity training' is just another way of someone making money, and some tick boxes being filled to make out like they've addressed things. You very rarely (if ever!) change people's deep convictions and cultural moorings through diversity training courses.  And even if they keep the odd harmless token around, it doesn't really prove anything. 

All that's happened is the racism/nationalism has gone underground and operates secretly. I see union jacks and red cross flags all over the place, all the time, so no, they aren't worried about showing it. Plus if you witnessed what vile and lowlife things used to get done by overt racists under these flags, you'd understand why so many people got embarrassed to be seen with them. Imagine if people would conspicuously use a nishaan sahib, pi55 and shyte on people's doorsteps, threaten and intimidate people who couldn't defend themselves, including women and children, attack lone people in packs, spit on people, abuse them, swear at them and much more.  If this was taking place quite frequently, by people 'proudly' rocking the nishaan sahib most of us would be embarrassed to be associated with it. 

 

I think the 'unconscious bias' ones are simply people who can't deal with the ugly reality and go into denial. A lot like some of our fudhoos when it comes to facing the reality of casteism in the panth. 

On 12/29/2018 at 4:06 AM, Guest Dumb Dia$pora said:

ikhs are busy conv

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/26/mother-of-murdered-sisters-backed-by-ex-police-chiefs-over-bias-claim

 

Mother of murdered sisters backed by ex-police chiefs over bias claim

Three former senior officers agree errors in search for missing women were due to biased policing

 

Vikram Dodd Police and crime correspondent

Tue 26 Oct 2021 20.43 BST

 

•  
•  
•  

 

 

Three former police chiefs have said errors made in the search for two missing sisters was the result of bias, as the murdered women’s mother dismissed as “hollow” an apology for the blunders.

The mother of Bibaa Henry, 46, and Nicole Smallman, 27, found murdered in June 2020 in a London park, said her daughters’ friends and family were left to search themselves after the Metropolitan police failed to do so.

 

Mina Smallman said the partner of one of her daughters who found the body has been left haunted and maintained bias had been a factor despite a report from the police watchdog finding no evidence it was.

Britain’s biggest force offered the apology after a report from the Independent Office for Police Conduct found failings.

The two sisters, Henry, a senior social worker, and Smallman, a photographer, were murdered in the park where they had been celebrating the elder sibling’s birthday.

The next day police were called, but no physical searches took place. The following days the bodies were found stabbed to death.

Sue Fish, the former chief constable of Nottinghamshire, said on Tuesday that bias had been a factor: “I see plenty of bias. The IOPC report gives licence to continue to fail people of colour, and women of colour, into the future.”

“It does not have a finding of racism, it addresses things in performance terms and misses this everyday casual unconscious bias against people of colour and women.”

Former Met chief superintendent Dal Babu said the mother of the murdered sisters was right in insisting bias was a factor: “If this had been a white, middle class social worker, would police have dealt with it differently. I’m convinced they would have.”

Babu, who has defended white officers against racism claims when he thought they were unmerited, said an independent investigation was needed into how missing persons’ cases are handled.

Former Met chief superintendent Victor Olisa, a former head of diversity at the force, said: “I think there is bias, I know the investigation of missing persons is not as professional as it ought to be.

“There is bias, the IOPC can’t find it.”

The IOPC identified that two police staff and one inspector performed poorly, and will not face a disciplinary hearing, but undergo action to improve their performance.

A call handler referred to one of the missing women as a “suspect” and appeared dismissive when a friend of one of the sisters phoned asking for help, the watchdog found.

 

[AkalkiFauj]

On 12/27/2018 at 9:47 AM, Guest jigsaw_puzzled_singh said:

2) The only Sikh diaspora that actually hate their own country

Who?

[Jacfsing2]

1 hour ago, AkalkiFauj said:

Who?

UK Sikhs

[Premi5]

2 hours ago, AkalkiFauj said:

Who?

 

49 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

UK Sikhs

No, most Sikhs I know are neutral or like being part of Britain. I have met none or heard none that 'hate' it. You might be confusing Sikhs with some other group(s). 

[Jacfsing2]

Just now, Premi5 said:

No, most Sikhs I know are neutral or like being part of Britain. I have met none or heard none that 'hate' it. You might be confusing Sikhs with some other group(s). 

I'm explaining what Jigsaw said,