BAME students make up one-fifth of new Oxford undergraduates https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jun/23/bame-students-make-up-one-fifth-of-new-oxford-undergraduates By comparison, in 2017, BAME students made up 26.2% of students at all UK universities. Widening access programmes have also resulted in an increase in the proportion of black students gaining places at Oxford, from 2.6% in 2018 to 3.1% last year, but the data shows many colleges still admitting few black students....
Given that black people are around 4% of the population, its surely not that surprising there are not that many at Oxford.
There are not that many in Britain, relatively speaking. This is not America.
If BAME students are 20% of Oxford's intake, then they are punching above their weight again, given Britain is 85% white.
There really is not that much to see here
That's not the game.
The game is to transpose America's exact problems and culture conflicts onto our own society, wholesale, regardless of the facts.
Remember, it's the right that's waging the culture war. Never the left, never the left...
Both are waging it but the big difference is the cause. The generals of the Left are doing it to change society. The generals of the Right are doing it to win "silent majority" elections under false pretences.
The amazing thing is that I think you actually believe this dangerous nonsense. Where was 'the spiteful vandalism of places of worship' in your explanation that the real aim of Woke was to reduce racism in personal interactions? This kind of wanton wrecking will achieve the exact opposite, if anything.
There are things said and done in the name of movements I support - e.g. "blacklivesmatter" and "metoo" and "timesup" which I find OTT and counterproductive. This will almost always be the case. You don't get powerful moments of sweeping change without excesses and pendulum overswing. It just doesn't work like that. So I need to weigh it up in the round and ask myself if I see the movement as a net plus or not. If it's the latter I will cease to support it. Otherwise, I keep rooting for it and that is the case for the ones I've referenced here.
So we're back to omelettes and eggs, aren't we? What if the voters and politicians who disagree with you decide to take an 'omelettes and eggs' approach when it comes to preventing this wonderful 'sweeping change'? Hostility and entrenchment on both sides - an outcome as predictable as it is corrosive.
I think most people are capable of supporting a movement whose cause they strongly approve of despite it sometimes saying or doing things they would prefer it didn't. Nothing special about me in this respect.
All right, so 'the ends justify the means' it is. At least Thucydides and Hobbes will be sardonically chuckling in their eternal rest.
You really are determinedly absolutist. Always seeking to drag me to the far corner of the reservation. Odd in somebody whose main criticism of the Left is their absolutism.
But look, marker down. If "BLM" turn seriously and habitually violent against people - as opposed to against statues of people - I'll be coming up off my knee.
I've got respect for the knee thing and in particular its reference to Mexico 1968 but it may soon have outlived its usefulness and the idea of pressuring anybody to do it is not good at all. Antifascists have to force themselves to see things from the fascist point of view. Imagine a symbolic racist response to BLM etc. that surpasses the "OK" signal for "WP" ("White Power"), and "Pepe" too, and captures the "silent" "majority". It could happen.
Imagine (only slightly fanciful this) you slipped into a coma last year, woke up next year, went back to work, and then made that gesture (innocently) in response to a colleague doing a great job.
You could lose your job, and you'd be completely baffled.
I make that gesture and have never heard anything otherwise in real life. Only on the internet on sites like this have I ever seen it meaning anything other than OK.
Context should matter. If I say OK to someone it should be clear from context what is being said.
Remember, it's the right that's waging the culture war. Never the left, never the left...
Both are waging it but the big difference is the cause. The generals of the Left are doing it to change society. The generals of the Right are doing it to win "silent majority" elections under false pretences.
The amazing thing is that I think you actually believe this dangerous nonsense. Where was 'the spiteful vandalism of places of worship' in your explanation that the real aim of Woke was to reduce racism in personal interactions? This kind of wanton wrecking will achieve the exact opposite, if anything.
There are things said and done in the name of movements I support - e.g. "blacklivesmatter" and "metoo" and "timesup" which I find OTT and counterproductive. This will almost always be the case. You don't get powerful moments of sweeping change without excesses and pendulum overswing. It just doesn't work like that. So I need to weigh it up in the round and ask myself if I see the movement as a net plus or not. If it's the latter I will cease to support it. Otherwise, I keep rooting for it and that is the case for the ones I've referenced here.
If fascists start violence against ethnic minorities and against those in the ethnic majority who oppose prejudice and discrimination towards ethnic minorities, it is no excuse for those who consider themselves to be conservative and not in the slightest bit fascist (with a bit of "Enoch was right" behind closed doors) to assert that the left were asking for this, nor to point out that such-and-such a figure on the left said something stupid about ethnicity or about anything else. There are fascists who are very serious about pushing things towards race war, and they have made quite a lot of headway already away from media headlines - witness the kinds of view that are often expressed by British soldiers on Arrse.co.uk. Meanwhile Stephen Bannon recommends that people read his beloved race-war novel "The Camp of the Saints" by Jean Raspail. He'd probably recommend "The Turner Diaries" if he could get away with it.
I do think this point is so important. There is no equivalence between the 2 sides of antifa or anti-racism activists and the racist cum fascist far right. The latter is wholly malign and beyond the pale. It is not (imo) a legitimate position to take. And every time the false equivalence is drawn - and it does keep being drawn including by many who ought to know better - the far right benefit. They become that tiny bit more acceptable and accepted.
PS: Mention of Enoch Powell. I wonder how much of the (to me) utterly ludicrous upset and anger about too much "taking the knee" is driven by a deep and primitive fear in people of Powell's warning coming to pass, of our society reaching a place where "the black man holds the whip hand over the white man." Is that in there somewhere?
Anyone here prepared to admit to this?
Given the screeching about 'subjugation and subordination' (™Dommer), I'd be heartily surprised if fear of the black man holding the whip hand over the white man doesn't figure in the 4am ruminations of these lads.
Remember, it's the right that's waging the culture war. Never the left, never the left...
Statues, though. Statues.
Generally, it's the right waging war against cultural change, with statues and stuff. Generally, it's the left that is driving cultural change, and, in the long run, winning the cultural wars.
I thought it was an odd comment from Ayesha Hazarika on the podacst last week that the Left doesn't win culture wars. Evidence would suggest that they've had a lot of success over the last three decades.
The problem, of course, is that they don't think that the war is ever won.
Will that war ever end? Will there ever be a stable end state? Or will cultural evolution continue until the last human being dies?
Society is always evolving. The internet has been revolutionary, for example. How we manage that is up for debate.
But certain things probably won’t change. Paedophilia, for example, is unlikely to be viewed in anything other than a very negative light. That didn’t stop some nutcases arguing otherwise.
The issue with BLM is that it’s an American thing. Quite how it’s relevant to the UK, I don’t know. And I think that’s what’s wound up a lot of people.
I don't think it's fair to say there is no relevance to the UK, there is a large aspect of UK society that is still racist. Look at the top of any company or the civil service and you will see the same old white male faces cloned thousands of times. There is a glass ceiling in this country, especially in the public sector for people who look like me that doesn't exist for people who don't. I'm not saying that the ceiling isn't much higher here than in the US and we are successfully raising it, but to pretend it doesn't exist helps no one.
But that’s different to the issue in America of racist police officers murdering black people (not Asian and not Hispanic people). Okay, I’m sure the issue you’ve raised applies there too, but that’s not the main issue as far as I can tell.
Also, you’re not black. Those wind up merchants flying that banner over the Etihad should have written Asian lives matter. That would have caused the media to have total malfunction.
To go back to your point about glass ceilings, as a civil servant, I know my place and that place is not above where I am now. Perhaps race (and gender) are issues, but I think personality is a much bigger issue. I’m not the right type of person. I’m too independent in terms of how I think. I can’t not call out bullshit. Those are not qualities desired for the senior civil service.
"So, I see your strengths, your CV speaks loud and clear on that. But let me throw you a curveball, ask a question that people can find difficult. What are your main weaknesses, would you say? Come on, be honest now."
"Hmm, well I'm a very independent thinker. That's the first thing that springs to mind. Maybe a bit too independent for some."
"OK. Anything else?"
"Yeah. I cannot, try as I might, tolerate bullshit. I just have to call it out."
"You have the job young man! Start Monday?"
The correct answer in a teaching interview when asked what your weakness is, is to say you spend too much time planning because you are overly concerned with the students doing well.
Although in my very first job I tipped the scale by saying I was obsessed with accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar.
- but we know what your real weakness is.
Raving loony centrism of the most extreme form imaginable.
Remember, it's the right that's waging the culture war. Never the left, never the left...
Both are waging it but the big difference is the cause. The generals of the Left are doing it to change society. The generals of the Right are doing it to win "silent majority" elections under false pretences.
The amazing thing is that I think you actually believe this dangerous nonsense. Where was 'the spiteful vandalism of places of worship' in your explanation that the real aim of Woke was to reduce racism in personal interactions? This kind of wanton wrecking will achieve the exact opposite, if anything.
There are things said and done in the name of movements I support - e.g. "blacklivesmatter" and "metoo" and "timesup" which I find OTT and counterproductive. This will almost always be the case. You don't get powerful moments of sweeping change without excesses and pendulum overswing. It just doesn't work like that. So I need to weigh it up in the round and ask myself if I see the movement as a net plus or not. If it's the latter I will cease to support it. Otherwise, I keep rooting for it and that is the case for the ones I've referenced here.
If fascists start violence against ethnic minorities and against those in the ethnic majority who oppose prejudice and discrimination towards ethnic minorities, it is no excuse for those who consider themselves to be conservative and not in the slightest bit fascist (with a bit of "Enoch was right" behind closed doors) to assert that the left were asking for this, nor to point out that such-and-such a figure on the left said something stupid about ethnicity or about anything else. There are fascists who are very serious about pushing things towards race war, and they have made quite a lot of headway already away from media headlines - witness the kinds of view that are often expressed by British soldiers on Arrse.co.uk. Meanwhile Stephen Bannon recommends that people read his beloved race-war novel "The Camp of the Saints" by Jean Raspail. He'd probably recommend "The Turner Diaries" if he could get away with it.
I do think this point is so important. There is no equivalence between the 2 sides of antifa or anti-racism activists and the racist cum fascist far right. The latter is wholly malign and beyond the pale. It is not (imo) a legitimate position to take. And every time the false equivalence is drawn - and it does keep being drawn including by many who ought to know better - the far right benefit. They become that tiny bit more acceptable and accepted.
PS: Mention of Enoch Powell. I wonder how much of the (to me) utterly ludicrous upset and anger about too much "taking the knee" is driven by a deep and primitive fear in people of Powell's warning coming to pass, of our society reaching a place where "the black man holds the whip hand over the white man." Is that in there somewhere?
Anyone here prepared to admit to this?
Given the screeching about 'subjugation and subordination' (™Dommer), I'd be heartily surprised if fear of the black man holding the whip hand over the white man doesn't figure in the 4am ruminations of these lads.
So in very rough terms BAME students at Oxford match or exceed percentage BAME in total population and black students slightly under. Once class taken into account any evidence of racism in admissions? Of course evidence is not needed to understand reality any more.
Do the Lib Dems have anyone talented? Davey seems the least bad but that's all I can really call him
Not that long ago we were asking the same question about Labour.
It was obvious Starmer was decent though, do the Lib Dems have anyone like that?
That was far from obvious. Because I didn’t know enough about him.
Same answer for the LibDems.
Edit - you might be a bit young to remember that there were the same questions in 2005 about the Tories - ‘if Howard, Letwin and Davis are the best the Tories can do, how useless are they?’ ....
The answer, of course, was 'you ain't seen nothing yet'.
BAME students make up one-fifth of new Oxford undergraduates https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jun/23/bame-students-make-up-one-fifth-of-new-oxford-undergraduates By comparison, in 2017, BAME students made up 26.2% of students at all UK universities. Widening access programmes have also resulted in an increase in the proportion of black students gaining places at Oxford, from 2.6% in 2018 to 3.1% last year, but the data shows many colleges still admitting few black students....
Given that black people are around 4% of the population, its surely not that surprising there are not that many at Oxford.
There are not that many in Britain, relatively speaking. This is not America.
If BAME students are 20% of Oxford's intake, then they are punching above their weight again, given Britain is 85% white.
There really is not that much to see here
Is this domestic students only? Otherwise those from Asia would inflate that number.
Remember that middle class Indians, Chinese etc are really white people, so don't count.
Marxists have calculated (probably correctly) that they have a better chance of achieving a marxist society by weaponising race rather than weaponising class.
BAME students make up one-fifth of new Oxford undergraduates https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jun/23/bame-students-make-up-one-fifth-of-new-oxford-undergraduates By comparison, in 2017, BAME students made up 26.2% of students at all UK universities. Widening access programmes have also resulted in an increase in the proportion of black students gaining places at Oxford, from 2.6% in 2018 to 3.1% last year, but the data shows many colleges still admitting few black students....
Given that black people are around 4% of the population, its surely not that surprising there are not that many at Oxford.
There are not that many in Britain, relatively speaking. This is not America.
If BAME students are 20% of Oxford's intake, then they are punching above their weight again, given Britain is 85% white.
There really is not that much to see here
You might usefully have a think about the age distribution of students going up to Oxford, and then have a think about getting some more relevant statistics.
American cases are surging, and have been for some time, especially in the South.
And yet, deaths are still gently but steadily declining.
I know "death" is a lagging indicator, but still. I am starting to wonder if the virus simply weakens, after a while. Or there is a hidden reservoir of healthy resistance.
There's the lagging indicator thing, of course. There's also the possibility (as over here) that older people are taking rather more care in terms of social distancing (certainly true of, for instance nursing homes). I'm not sure anyone's publishing the overall age profile of new cases, though.
Next US president (projected EC votes as result of election), midprices: Biden 1.745 Trump 2.67
Republican candidate (as result of convention), last matched prices: Trump 1.07 Pence 30 Haley 70 Romney 170 Ryan 490 Kasich 590 D Johnson 700 C Rice 710 Sasse 800 Owens 810 Cruz 850
Trump today will address "Students for Trump" at a church in Phoenix, Arizona. Organisers say they expect 3000, whom they will ask but not require to wear masks.
They don't get it, do they? If they did, they'd choose from the following options:
* make masks compulsory * don't hold such events * "double down" on "We're not pussies. We don't need no stinking masks! Infection figures are fake news!" and hope the (surviving) wrestling fan vote overwhelms the rest of the population in four and a half months' time.
Not sure if this has been mentioned - Fox got a big audience bump off Trump's speech. So even if his supports weren't there, he probably reached his base quite well
Nobody doubts that the base still love him, it's not the base he needs to worry about.
In addition the examples of the base that I have seen interviewed during this pandemic come across as quite unhinged. I'm sure they are a turn-off to many independents and moderates.
Personally I think the original tweet is just trolling, and the tweet above is a good answer - like Monbiot boosting the made up stuff about the GCMG the other week.
It is a very old question indeed.
Seeking to portray Christ as like the local community is as old as the hills, or altrnatively as the perceived original ME ethnicity. Christianity is all about incarnation so there's a built-in drive to contextualise.
They might as well demand that any portrayal not-as-a-carpenter not be allowed, or demand a question mark because they believe JC did not really exist. Not everyone is a literalist.
Portrayals in medieval Europe tend to look European; portrayals in eg the Ethiopian orthodox tend to look different, as would be expected.
If you look in the right place you can find Christ-of-the-Ascension portrayed as a pair of feet vanishing into a cloud. Perhaps he now needs socks so people don't get offended by the colour of his skin?
Perhaps they also need to reflect on the Black Madonnas of Europe.
Remember, it's the right that's waging the culture war. Never the left, never the left...
Both are waging it but the big difference is the cause. The generals of the Left are doing it to change society. The generals of the Right are doing it to win "silent majority" elections under false pretences.
The amazing thing is that I think you actually believe this dangerous nonsense. Where was 'the spiteful vandalism of places of worship' in your explanation that the real aim of Woke was to reduce racism in personal interactions? This kind of wanton wrecking will achieve the exact opposite, if anything.
There are things said and done in the name of movements I support - e.g. "blacklivesmatter" and "metoo" and "timesup" which I find OTT and counterproductive. This will almost always be the case. You don't get powerful moments of sweeping change without excesses and pendulum overswing. It just doesn't work like that. So I need to weigh it up in the round and ask myself if I see the movement as a net plus or not. If it's the latter I will cease to support it. Otherwise, I keep rooting for it and that is the case for the ones I've referenced here.
So we're back to omelettes and eggs, aren't we? What if the voters and politicians who disagree with you decide to take an 'omelettes and eggs' approach when it comes to preventing this wonderful 'sweeping change'? Hostility and entrenchment on both sides - an outcome as predictable as it is corrosive.
I think most people are capable of supporting a movement whose cause they strongly approve of despite it sometimes saying or doing things they would prefer it didn't. Nothing special about me in this respect.
All right, so 'the ends justify the means' it is. At least Thucydides and Hobbes will be sardonically chuckling in their eternal rest.
You really are determinedly absolutist. Always seeking to drag me to the far corner of the reservation. Odd in somebody whose main criticism of the Left is their absolutism.
But look, marker down. If "BLM" turn seriously and habitually violent against people - as opposed to against statues of people - I'll be coming up off my knee.
I've got respect for the knee thing and in particular its reference to Mexico 1968 but it may soon have outlived its usefulness and the idea of pressuring anybody to do it is not good at all. Antifascists have to force themselves to see things from the fascist point of view. Imagine a symbolic racist response to BLM etc. that surpasses the "OK" signal for "WP" ("White Power"), and "Pepe" too, and captures the "silent" "majority". It could happen.
I think the ostentatious finger-on-lip (as in the goal celebration) could work well for that.
Says "hush" to all the noisy wokes and uppity wimmin.
But I don't want to be of help, so please delete this immediately after reading.
Remember, it's the right that's waging the culture war. Never the left, never the left...
Statues, though. Statues.
Generally, it's the right waging war against cultural change, with statues and stuff. Generally, it's the left that is driving cultural change, and, in the long run, winning the cultural wars.
I thought it was an odd comment from Ayesha Hazarika on the podacst last week that the Left doesn't win culture wars. Evidence would suggest that they've had a lot of success over the last three decades.
The problem, of course, is that they don't think that the war is ever won.
Will that war ever end? Will there ever be a stable end state? Or will cultural evolution continue until the last human being dies?
Society is always evolving. The internet has been revolutionary, for example. How we manage that is up for debate.
But certain things probably won’t change. Paedophilia, for example, is unlikely to be viewed in anything other than a very negative light. That didn’t stop some nutcases arguing otherwise.
The issue with BLM is that it’s an American thing. Quite how it’s relevant to the UK, I don’t know. And I think that’s what’s wound up a lot of people.
I don't think it's fair to say there is no relevance to the UK, there is a large aspect of UK society that is still racist. Look at the top of any company or the civil service and you will see the same old white male faces cloned thousands of times. There is a glass ceiling in this country, especially in the public sector for people who look like me that doesn't exist for people who don't. I'm not saying that the ceiling isn't much higher here than in the US and we are successfully raising it, but to pretend it doesn't exist helps no one.
But that’s different to the issue in America of racist police officers murdering black people (not Asian and not Hispanic people). Okay, I’m sure the issue you’ve raised applies there too, but that’s not the main issue as far as I can tell.
Also, you’re not black. Those wind up merchants flying that banner over the Etihad should have written Asian lives matter. That would have caused the media to have total malfunction.
To go back to your point about glass ceilings, as a civil servant, I know my place and that place is not above where I am now. Perhaps race (and gender) are issues, but I think personality is a much bigger issue. I’m not the right type of person. I’m too independent in terms of how I think. I can’t not call out bullshit. Those are not qualities desired for the senior civil service.
"So, I see your strengths, your CV speaks loud and clear on that. But let me throw you a curveball, ask a question that people can find difficult. What are your main weaknesses, would you say? Come on, be honest now."
"Hmm, well I'm a very independent thinker. That's the first thing that springs to mind. Maybe a bit too independent for some."
"OK. Anything else?"
"Yeah. I cannot, try as I might, tolerate bullshit. I just have to call it out."
"You have the job young man! Start Monday?"
The correct answer in a teaching interview when asked what your weakness is, is to say you spend too much time planning because you are overly concerned with the students doing well.
Although in my very first job I tipped the scale by saying I was obsessed with accurate spelling, punctuation and grammar.
The kind of answer that shouldn't fool an experienced interviewer, but usually does... When your 'weakness' is really a strength!
So every PB Tory on here right now is pleased with Starmers response.
Fantastic
That is probably a good thing. It means he's much more likely to win a bunch of votes from the centre.
None of the aforesaid PB Toties will vote any differently.
So if even those people are somewhat impressed, surely that bodes well for the truly floating voters?
They are not impressed, they are just relieved that KS isn't landing any blows on their degenerate scumbag of a leader.
Starmer knows that Johnson skips the reading list and just wings his essay at the last minute, hence his asking detailed questions about the thinking and analysis done during the government’s decision-making process, knowing that there won’t have been very much.
PS Reflecting, the argument is as old as the New Testament - a big chunk of the argument in Acts of the Apostles is about whether JC is for the Jews, or for the entire world.
And the resolution was for 'universal' rather than being sectarian. After a dialogue.
American cases are surging, and have been for some time, especially in the South.
And yet, deaths are still gently but steadily declining.
I know "death" is a lagging indicator, but still. I am starting to wonder if the virus simply weakens, after a while. Or there is a hidden reservoir of healthy resistance.
Wow. How many months has it taken for you to press the ‘on’ button in your brain!
Remember, it's the right that's waging the culture war. Never the left, never the left...
Both are waging it but the big difference is the cause. The generals of the Left are doing it to change society. The generals of the Right are doing it to win "silent majority" elections under false pretences.
The amazing thing is that I think you actually believe this dangerous nonsense. Where was 'the spiteful vandalism of places of worship' in your explanation that the real aim of Woke was to reduce racism in personal interactions? This kind of wanton wrecking will achieve the exact opposite, if anything.
There are things said and done in the name of movements I support - e.g. "blacklivesmatter" and "metoo" and "timesup" which I find OTT and counterproductive. This will almost always be the case. You don't get powerful moments of sweeping change without excesses and pendulum overswing. It just doesn't work like that. So I need to weigh it up in the round and ask myself if I see the movement as a net plus or not. If it's the latter I will cease to support it. Otherwise, I keep rooting for it and that is the case for the ones I've referenced here.
If fascists start violence against ethnic minorities and against those in the ethnic majority who oppose prejudice and discrimination towards ethnic minorities, it is no excuse for those who consider themselves to be conservative and not in the slightest bit fascist (with a bit of "Enoch was right" behind closed doors) to assert that the left were asking for this, nor to point out that such-and-such a figure on the left said something stupid about ethnicity or about anything else. There are fascists who are very serious about pushing things towards race war, and they have made quite a lot of headway already away from media headlines - witness the kinds of view that are often expressed by British soldiers on Arrse.co.uk. Meanwhile Stephen Bannon recommends that people read his beloved race-war novel "The Camp of the Saints" by Jean Raspail. He'd probably recommend "The Turner Diaries" if he could get away with it.
I do think this point is so important. There is no equivalence between the 2 sides of antifa or anti-racism activists and the racist cum fascist far right. The latter is wholly malign and beyond the pale. It is not (imo) a legitimate position to take. And every time the false equivalence is drawn - and it does keep being drawn including by many who ought to know better - the far right benefit. They become that tiny bit more acceptable and accepted.
PS: Mention of Enoch Powell. I wonder how much of the (to me) utterly ludicrous upset and anger about too much "taking the knee" is driven by a deep and primitive fear in people of Powell's warning coming to pass, of our society reaching a place where "the black man holds the whip hand over the white man." Is that in there somewhere?
Anyone here prepared to admit to this?
Perhaps we should look at South Africa, where the black man does, to use your phrase, hold the whip over the white man.
My daughter and her entire team have just been paid off by Tesco's who seem to have decided that they need fewer people to cope with home deliveries. Quite a few jobs lost.
She's pretty gutted. It was only ever going to be a stepping stone for her but it has kept her busy and put some money in the bank.
Comments
The game is to transpose America's exact problems and culture conflicts onto our own society, wholesale, regardless of the facts.
Raving loony centrism of the most extreme form imaginable.
Duty calls. Have a good afternoon.
https://twitter.com/jchelle36/status/1274340015951273984?s=21
‘At?’
‘Of’ is bad enough.
It’s ‘bored with’.
There's also the possibility (as over here) that older people are taking rather more care in terms of social distancing (certainly true of, for instance nursing homes). I'm not sure anyone's publishing the overall age profile of new cases, though.
In addition the examples of the base that I have seen interviewed during this pandemic come across as quite unhinged. I'm sure they are a turn-off to many independents and moderates.
It is a very old question indeed.
Seeking to portray Christ as like the local community is as old as the hills, or altrnatively as the perceived original ME ethnicity. Christianity is all about incarnation so there's a built-in drive to contextualise.
They might as well demand that any portrayal not-as-a-carpenter not be allowed, or demand a question mark because they believe JC did not really exist. Not everyone is a literalist.
Portrayals in medieval Europe tend to look European; portrayals in eg the Ethiopian orthodox tend to look different, as would be expected.
If you look in the right place you can find Christ-of-the-Ascension portrayed as a pair of feet vanishing into a cloud. Perhaps he now needs socks so people don't get offended by the colour of his skin?
Perhaps they also need to reflect on the Black Madonnas of Europe.
eg Ethiopian, Chinese
Says "hush" to all the noisy wokes and uppity wimmin.
But I don't want to be of help, so please delete this immediately after reading.
Idiot.
And the resolution was for 'universal' rather than being sectarian. After a dialogue.
Betting PostF1: backed a special on Hamilton to get a podium in the first 8 races of the season at 4.5 (Ladbrokes).
Now, that's probably badly worded, but if it's correct that's ridiculous value. However, even if it it means at every race, that happened last year.
Any others?
She's pretty gutted. It was only ever going to be a stepping stone for her but it has kept her busy and put some money in the bank.