Consider the implications of this:
Nature documentaries presented by “white, male voices” could put off ethnic minority views, according to a report funded by Britain’s major environmental agency.
Last year, the Environment Agency financially supported the study by an international climate change group which said the use of white narrators could make the sector feel “inaccessible to people from ethnic minorities”.
The melaninly diverse (and genderly, perhaps) discriminate by melanin content (and perhaps gender) on who they will accept scientific information from. That’s what that statement above is.
It’s also widely accepted that those with the gammon melanin are more racist than others. This is justified by defining racism as only ever punching downwards – when it’s punching upwards it’s maintaining community or cultural cohesion or some such.
OK. So, now we’ve got those two points being made as factual statements by the grievance industry. This does therefore mean that gammons will be even more racist in who they will accept scientific information from, doesn’t it? If the two grievance statements are true then so must that conclusion.
Which therefore means that we must have exclusively gammons presenting scientific information to the populace. Gammons are 84% of all, gammons are more racist than the diverse, therefore to gain maximum acceptance of science, science must be presented by gammons.
QED.
The only way this cannot be true – unless we going to go down that apartheid route of separate but equal – is if one of the two original statements about melanin discrimination by the melaninly is untrue, or if all can be equally racist.
The Environment Agency could use part of their budget to fund alternative programmes for people of colour, like the following example:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Ge4oufdIOMc
So the presentation by black female voices will piss off ethnic majorities??
But I thought they wanted to persuade people that the climate garbage is true. Or are they just saying, ‘You should grovel and obey the words of your dusky masters ‘cos they’re black. No matter what they say.’
We have a solution.
https://www.bbc.com/pidgin
‘… an international climate change group…’
I’m put off ‘Nature’ documentaries because they are finger-wag-fests about how naughty Man is trashing ‘the’ environment, causing Climagheddon and killing the Planet.
Ethnic minorities aren’t as stupid as the nice White Middle-Class-more-money-then-sense, mindless-blob ecoloons, so probably are put off by this too.
Is there a racial component to common sense? Certainly not what I’ve observed. In my experience it is the white middle class that are subject to woke nonsense, diverse working class? not so much.
I is voicing a documentary on badgers, innit
Incidentally, I haven’t watched telly in years. Was speaking to a young, female, politically correct relative who still does.
She can’t understand why adverts keep trying to make her believe most white British women are married to negroes.
Steve, it sounds as if your young relative is cruising, however slowly, towards a lightbulb moment.
In due course, give her a lollipop and welcome her to the dark side.
A further point.
Given that so much advertising is aspirational in nature, I sometimes wonder how black women feel about the implication that their men should aspire to a white woman.
nature documentaries rarely offer anything that might reasonably be called science!