so it's positive discrimination when the rfl out forward Ben Thaler as an international referee? You would be happy with a completely Australian refereeing team at the next world cup?

It is idiotic nonsense to argue that having a French referee in a part French competition is positive discrimination

It is no good explaining to him though. He is one of these narrow minded big mouths, who believes he is right everytime, and proceeds to accuse others rather than look at his own faults, which is usual for those losing an argument.

Actively trying to recruit persons from a particular under represented background is not positive discrimination.

Do you think perhaps there might be reason why fewer minorities may become for instance police officers? That there are inherent disadvantages to minorities entering the police force and that different recruitment methods might be needed to redress that?

Does it not seem obvious to you that the opportunities for women to enter the boardrooms of RL clubs might be limited? That there is an inherent unfairness in how those positions are given? It doesn't strike you as strange at all that despite making up more than 50% of the population 0 women are capable of being board members at the Roosters? All women in Australia who would wish to be a director at the Roosters are less qualified to do so than Luke Ricketson?

I find it telling that you assume that all the straight white men who are board members at the Roosters are all there because they are super qualified and are all high performers and got their job by being the best at what they do. A women meanwhile is a token gesture given a job to appease the equality people and it's perfectly reasonable to assume a referee is only given games because he is gay despite him never actually mentioning it in public.

I never mentioned the sexuality of the Roosters board members - is bringing that up your hidden agenda or discrimination coming to light?

And it is absolutely positive discrimination - you're employing them based on something other than or in addition to their ability. The Roosters have a highly successful board, replacing someone to include a female board member is only being done to hit an equality campaign

Whilst not wanting to get mired down in the rights and wrongs of positive discrimination, it does exist. The two examples you give reference recruiting police officers from minorities and women on to NRL boards and how it is done by altering the process to redress disadvantage, is by definition, POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION.

See what I mean.

All through this thread you have proved the point Printer and I initially raised, and still your narrow minded self righteous nonsense comes to the fore. You need to get your head out of books and blogs, and start seeing the world for what it is from real experience.

And do you have a problem with that?

I'm pointing out that it is strangely coincidental that despite making up a minority of the population straight white men make up the entirety of the Roosters based.

It isn't positive discrimination, it's an attempt to mitigate the inherent institutional advantages available to one section of the populations.

Do you not think it strange that 40% of Australians are not of European ancestry. That 50% are not male. Yet 100% of the Roosters board are both males and of European ancestry?

Woman are 50% of Australia's population and have 6 NRL board seats. There is 1 openly gay referee and 1 gay player in the professional game. And we are supposed to believe we have a problem with POSITIVE discrimination?

If the process has an inherent bias to one particular group then removing or overcoming that bias isn't positive discrimination. That is equality.

The problem with the position you are taking here is it assumes from the outset that there is no bias. That the current process treats everyone equally and that a minority is given an advantage by things changing or being done differently, it forgets that the status quo has inherent benefits to some parties. The status quo already discriminates.

And you have proven yourself to be a bigot and a homophobe.

Hey but at least you and printer are brave enough and comfortable enough to use someone's sexuality to call in to question someone's career and achievements. Thankfully people like you two are brave enough to anonymously lob unevidenced accusations at a man for doing his job. Lest we be over-run by this apparent scourge of gay referees the RFL's gay agenda are forcing on us. How proud you must be of yourself.

When and where did James Child publicly announce his sexuality then?

He kept it quite until the week after the Hardaker incident last year, then on Facebook he put up a new profile picture of him and his partner, declaring how proud he was. I know this because I am a friend of someone who is also a friend of Childs on facebook, so saw it straight away.

I don't know if you use facebook, but I would assume if you look at his profile the date of his profile picture will show there.

There is only you, you make look silly.

And by the way, and we had this last year, I employ someone who is openly homosexual, so you can put your unwarranted accusations away.

This is probably my favourite post ever.