Apology accepted. Please be more careful in the future.
I don't understand what you're getting at here. Racism is a thing, and people who are not of the majority white population in the UK face unique challenges on account of their demographic status. I do not see any harm in workplaces having spaces and resources available to help out such employees and/or their families who may be experiencing those kind of issues. I don't see how not talking about racism is going to address it. Saying "I don't see colour" doesn't change the fact that other people do, and will act accordingly.
I think you vastly overestimate the amount of real estate required. We have quiet rooms in the Manchester office of the company I work for, and these can be used for a variety of purposes. Whether it's a neurodivergent person who needs a space that's out of the way of foot traffic in order to concentrate on a particularly challenging piece of work, or a Muslim who needs somewhere to pray.
Why? What do you think that a physical safe space actually entails? How common do you know (not think, know, so be prepared to document this knowledge) this practice to be? Can you point to an example that you find particularly egregious? And why?
The spaces and networks exist at least in part because we do not, in fact, live in a post-racial utopia.
What physical segregation? There is none. Even in workplaces with physical rooms dedicated solely to their BAME network activities, I very much doubt that any of them are forcibly separating employees based on skin colour, at least in the UK. That would be illegal and would open the employer up to discrimination cases at employment tribunals. The company's legal department would probably have a fit. You're tilting at windmills.
Again, you can only speak for yourself in that regard.
Hold on a minute. I need to bring you back to how his debate started.
I was critisizing corporates for telling customers that they are "racist" and should "Take their business elsewhere" merely for saying that they didn't think BAME safe-places is a good idea or otherwise devisive.
That's it.
If a company decides that BAME safe spaces benefits them, that's their business. I take a dim view of it, but that's not enough for me to boycott Sainsbury's, unless I start to see workers (Of any colour) on the news complaining that it's causing them problems.
However, if they (Sainsbury's for example) then tweet about it, claiming that it combats racism, then with a very very big tar brush tweets something like "Racists who have a problem with it, should take their business elsewhere", while is their legal right, is very insulting to anyone who has a problem with it.
I might be right to have a dim view of safe-spaces. I might be wrong.
But a corporate (or anyone else for that matter) claiming that everyone who opposes, is somehow racist, is so far beyond nuts, I wonder whether it's a deliberate provocation to drumb up publicity.
Marketing departments do it and think they will get away with it, because right wingers are statistically nowhere near as good as the left at boycotting.
The left likes to give their business to businesses that are seen and believed to support left wing causes, over neutral companies.
The right isn't as interested in the politics of the companies who produce the produce they consume.
And that isn't a critisim of people with left wing views.
