White men discriminating against white men.

Our thanks to George for this:

“For most of my career I worked as a mechanical engineer in engine research and development  – a type of work heavily dominated by white men. It is hardly new to say that in such environments women and nonwhites are preferentially promoted. This is a given – it is the nature of the diversity racket. Or rather, the one-sided diversity racket, as there’s never a problem with workplaces dominated by women or nonwhites. Somehow, these are okay.

In my personal experience, there’s an angle to this racket that I’ve never seen mentioned.

During my career, I spent hundreds of hours of my own time writing two large texts on engines. These books established my name internationally – but not with my employer. Rather, my own management continued to treat me as an unpromotable nullity. I never got beyond senior engineer, and, in fact, barely any knowledge displayed in the books was ever used by my employer. I was tolerated and humoured, not valued and acknowledged. Promotions were strictly by ‘invitation only’. And I was never invited. 

Now if you listen to the diversity grifters, they will say (or imply) that there’s a nefarious tribe of ‘white men’, the members of which look out for one another, and nudge aside women and nonwhites. This is BOLLOCKS. A white man can still be excluded or ‘othered’ by white men. The reasons, however, will be very subtle and not easily determined; not obvious ones like gonads or skin colour. A couple of colleagues explained my situation by saying that I’m ‘different’. When I asked what they meant by that, they were not able to say. But in my opinion, the managers were an odious clique that promoted men most like themselves. They were prepared to promote women because they were women, and to promote nonwhites because they were nonwhite, as, otherwise, awkward questions would arise.  But they never promoted white men, just because they were white men. Instead, they promoted white men who were most like themselves; men that slotted nicely into their little clique.

Now if I were a woman or black, and I were dissatisfied with my situation, I could grab a copy of my cv and trot along to an employment lawyer. I’d describe my experiences, and concoct a case. I could say, ‘how come when promotions appear, I’m never considered?” I could say, ‘I’ve provided concrete evidence of what I know, so how come the management never make use of what I offer?’ In other words, I could claim discrimination. Now very probably, there would be no discrimination  – but I could CLAIM it.  And this would give me leverage.

But since I’m a white man working for white men, what case would I have? NONE. White men never discriminate against a white man because he’s a white man !

This is the REAL discrimination. I am discriminated against, because I cannot claim that I’m being discriminated against.” 

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

3 thoughts on “White men discriminating against white men.

  1. This fits in with my upcoming video “Playing the Man, not the Ball”. How men, in particular white men, have a negative in-group preference, and will instinctively put women first. George, you are right to say that men looking out for men is BOLLOCKS. I’ll be publishing the video in 1-2 weeks on my channel Andy Antifeminist. I’m sure it will chime with your experience.

    Liked by 2 people

      • Indeed. Until very recently white men were by far the most numerous in all the formal positions and institutions in our Society. Not only was it men in the nineteenth century that put into legislation and social norms based on the idea women were inherently virtuous and fragile. It was men who dismantled and repealed the very same laws and norms in the 60s,70s and 80s. Subsequently feminists have sought to revive a similar idea, women’s inherent victimhood and superior moral standing, in another way to ensure they have a similar set of privileges putting them on a pedestal again. Gynocentrism? Gamma Bias?. I was interested that with regards to exam results the Grauniad reported the the “Gender Gap” had narrowed slightly to 5% a gap of course in favour of Girls. Oddly enough this gap is about the same found in two international studies and one domestic (UK) I which girls are marked up by 5% compared to bling marking and making of boys. Most interesting that this same gap appeared to be universal including countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran where one might expect “patriarchy” to hold sway. I give great credence to this a. because in each case the hypothesis being tested was that the reverse is true (all were done by feminists) and b. the pattern is shown in countries whose societies are varied indeed (rather than just “western” advanced. Suggesting its not a “social construct” but a very deep preference for Girls. The same pattern of preferencing applied to male and female teachers by the way. Of course this influences the results in two ways, in actual marking but perhaps more importantly in the expectations of teachers in their projections as shown in assessments or “mock” exams. The boys are simply fulfilling the lower expectations. The aftermath of the pandemic showed this with the period of assessment replaced by exams again.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment