Political Correctness,

[Aurielius]

@darkfox

I must be running on empty today having read and reread your post I am left with a sense of ambiguity about your position on reparations, care to clarify for me?

[ginnyfizz]

No blame culture? Is that why we have bandwagon-jumping lawyers making vast amounts of money pursuing legal actions getting vast amounts of compensation for their clients by sticking the blame on someone? Whether you call it blame culture or compensation culture, it exists, and it is putting up your insurance costs. I am not talking about the really serious accidents where people are catastrophically injured, but the minor trips or bumps in your car, that once no-one would have thought of sueing for. Now, due to the politically correct/received wisdom/everyone is a victim/blame culture, of course it is anyone's fault but yours and they must pay. The unfortunate consequences of this increasing litigiousness is that insurance costs are reaching for the sky. My motor insurance nearly doubled this renewal date, and when I queried it, the company said it was because of the epidemic of claims.

 

It all seems to be about rights, with no mention of responsibilities.

 

Seriously, in the case I was talking about concerning the slave trade apologies, it is two hundred years since Britain moved its abolition - slavery exists to this day, but in Britain it is illegal, therefore asking the city fathers of Liverpool and Bristol to apologise for it at such a remove is nothing but political grandstanding.

 

Blackbaron2, I am sorry to say that your statement "You are extremely unlikely to be at all persecuted for being white, at least in the UK and US." is a typical example of what people feel to be political correctness. The view that if you are white and heterosexual you cannot be the victim of discrimination on the grounds of your colour or orientation. Well that's not what the law says and it isn't what happens in practice. The problem is that it would be almost impossible to expand on this because of err...political correctness.

[myrmaad]

/facepalm.

 

You've got to be kidding.

 

I have two nieces who were removed from their home for neglect at the ages of 5 and 7. One (we'll call her niece 1) went to a house where she was the only girl and had to watch baseball, and endure a stern father figure who worked nights and slept during the day, so the house was kept neat as pin and quiet as a mouse every day. On Easter she wore a beautiful new dress made for her by my aunt, and at Christmas she reaped the benefits of being the girl child my aunt had always yearned for but had 3 boys and cervical cancer that resulted in a hysterectomy.

 

The other (Neice 2) went to a farm where there was always a lot of work to do, but little money spent on frivolous things. Mornings she was awakened with a glass of ice water in the face if she dared oversleep, and holidays were grim reminders that she was not one of the children who belonged there. She was teased at school because she didn't have time to wash the cowshit off before she changed to meet the bus. That didn't work out to well, so the aunt who had custody of her quietly gave her up to the state without notifying the rest of the family, and that's just scratching the surface.

 

Niece 1 to this day has hysterical crying jags if you imply she had it better than Niece 2.

 

Guess which one I'm reminded of.

[csgators]

@ginnyfizz

 

"The problem is that it would be almost impossible to expand on this because of err...political correctness. "

 

I had been tempted to reply to this thread a few times but your quote above sums up why I haven't.

[BlackBaron2]

Nobody is saying it can't or doesn't happen, Ginnyfizz--just that it's not likely in Western culture. White, heterosexual, usually male, rich people have the power and privilege in Western culture. You are missing the point, which is that it does not usually happen. :wallbash:

 

White, heterosexual people are not constantly persecuted for skintone and orientation, or even often, in the UK and US. Your family probably won't disown you for choosing the life with the white picket fences, and generally complying with 1950s American morality. You're unlikely to be passed up for a job, or generally be treated as "less" than a whole person based solely on your skintone and orientation if you happen to be a straight, white person.

 

Note:

I am not ignorant of discrimination against Caucasian people in other countries. I went to school in South Africa when I was younger, and yes, I did get bullied for being white. I have common sense enough to see that it's not the same thing as being expected to not be horrible to someone based on their skintone, sex, gender identity or sexual orientation.

[ginnyfizz]

/facepalm.

 

You've got to be kidding.

 

I have two nieces who were removed from their home for neglect at the ages of 5 and 7. One (we'll call her niece 1) went to a house where she was the only girl and had to watch baseball, and endure a stern father figure who worked nights and slept during the day, so the house was kept neat as pin and quiet as a mouse every day. On Easter she wore a beautiful new dress made for her by my aunt, and at Christmas she reaped the benefits of being the girl child my aunt had always yearned for but had 3 boys and cervical cancer that resulted in a hysterectomy.

 

The other (Neice 2) went to a farm where there was always a lot of work to do, but little money spent on frivolous things. Mornings she was awakened with a glass of ice water in the face if she dared oversleep, and holidays were grim reminders that she was not one of the children who belonged there. She was teased at school because she didn't have time to wash the cowshit off before she changed to meet the bus. That didn't work out to well, so the aunt who had custody of her quietly gave her up to the state without notifying the rest of the family, and that's just scratching the surface.

 

Niece 1 to this day has hysterical crying jags if you imply she had it better than Niece 2.

 

Guess which one I'm reminded of.

 

Myrmaad, I am not sure whether or not that is meant to be some kind of semi oblique personal attack, because I sure as hell cannot see what relevance at all it has to the debate. I would be grateful if you would explain what you mean.

 

I do not accept that it is unlikely in Western culture to be persecuted for being white and heterosexual, or to be passed up for a job because of it. In certain parts of certain cities in the UK, in certain professions/job roles, even in education, there are degrees of both direct and indirect discrimination. As part of my training for my current job I completed Equality and Diversity training and some of the case studies were quite surprising. The fact is that discrimination on grounds of colour and orientation goes both ways, but the climate is such that it is not acceptable to say so, or state examples, without risking charges of race hate.

 

I can totally accept that African Caribbean, Asian and other ethnic groups, as well as gay, lesbian, bi and transgender people, have suffered persecution and injustice, I do not see why it is so hard to accept that it can and does happen to white straight people. Apart from the fact that it isn't politically correct to do so.

[myrmaad]

It was not meant a personal attack, it is a personal anecdote of my own life experience used to make a point.

 

I do not see why it is so hard to accept that it can and does happen to white straight people. Apart from the fact that it isn't politically correct to do so.

 

What's hard to accept is that you don't see the difference.

[ginnyfizz]

There can be no difference where discrimination is concerned. It doesn't matter who is being discriminated against, it is still wrong either way. Leastways that's what the law over here says.

[myrmaad]

Of course there is. It's apples and oranges.

 

I have a pressing family matter I'm putting off for a few minutes to answer you, so sorry if I seem brief.

 

You're talking isolated events where you are in a minority situation, but where you are normally a fully functioning member of society.

 

Racism is the systematic oppression of one group of lesser social position by the group who holds more social, political, and economic power.

 

Those two words, systematic oppression make the difference. That's all I have time for at the moment.

[greywaste]

There can be no difference where discrimination is concerned. It doesn't matter who is being discriminated against, it is still wrong either way. Leastways that's what the law over here says.

The reason why nobody will agree with you Ginny, is because if they did, It'd be too hard to answer the question "Well who's responsible for descrimination?"

It's also the reason why adjectives like "white trash" don't raise an eyebrow.

 

(Oh as an aside, I lived in Peckham for 5 years so I do get it.. but there's not much point elaborating)

 

In anycase, I'll state in support, all discrimination is wrong - period.