h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Ooooh!

Novo

You'll thank me for it.

Sorry to change the subject, but....

When I was in primary school (early 80s) there were three children from BME groups in my class, plus a number of children with family from other European countries. One of these children ended up with a nickname that was related to the colour of his skin - not derogatory, but not really appropriate either. When I was young we didn't see many non-white faces on TV, and there weren't many non-whites living in the immediate area at the time.

The nickname was based on novelty, and I think was partly because there was another boy with the same first name in the class. As far as I remember, he wasn't treated any differently or subjected to any abuse or prejudice. Very young children are generally pretty colour-blind in that sense. It also wasn't a nickname he ever objected to as far as I remember.

It doesn't make sense to label very young children as 'racist', but that's not the point. It's not the child who is 'racist', but the behaviour. Like a lot of negative behaviour from very young children, it's often not deliberate, not malicious, and stems from a lack of knowledge about the world and a lack of insight into the feelings of others. Which is hardly surprising.

It's hard to believe that no teacher ever overheard any of the children in the class using that nickname, yet nothing was ever said. All the proposal "reported" in the Telegraph is about is that in cases of this sort teachers should intervene, even if no apparent harm or distress is caused.

Does anyone have any serious objection to this? Does anyone really think that the teachers should have allowed us to continue to use inappropriate nicknames?

It's difficult to know exactly what was meant by reporting incidents to the council, but it surely makes sense to keep records of any such incidents in the event of complaints from parents.

As Edward has said, that Telegraph article is an absolute disgrace in terms of distortion and manipulation of the facts.

On the subject of media manipulation, did anyone see the interview with the journalist from the Express on the 'Dispatches' programme about Islamophobia?

It's a shame he was never asked directly: "why do you print stories that you must know aren't true, or deliberately distort them in ways that you know a prejudicial to community relations?"

But he kind of answered it himself. He said that the first duty of the Express was to reflect the views of Express readers and then made various appeals to the right to free speech. A very revealing performance.

Most people would think that the first duty of a newspaper would be to report the news, but this was pretty much an admission that this wasn't the case with the Express.

And it's no good appealing to the right of free speech - there's no right to speak malicious falsehoods. Funny how appeals to freedom of speech seem to be the second refuge of the scoundrel.

So there we have it.... the first duty of the Express is to reflect the prejudices of its readers, not to the truth.

>> I hope that I am no worse than any other OAP in wishing that things I knew and places I knew remained as they were - however silly that is. <<

Not silly at all, but as a senior myself I'm actually quite glad so many things have changed over my lifetime. It'll make it a lot easier to leave behind knbowing the balance has finally reached the tipping point and the end is nigher than we think.

Seeing how f&^&*d up the whirled has become and how ignorant most young folks are (especially when it come to the zeal with which they embrace assorted idealised and implausibe agendas - such as fixing the whirled with a hug) I'm really glad to see nothing has really changed except the devilish details. And with me or without me it's pretty much "all over now Baby Blue".


~jwf~

firstly...

Squiggles: Don't come the reactionary auld fart. It's silly pose and you know it. Our youth are not ignorant. They are constantly discovering things undreamt of my you or me. May you rest in your dearly anticipated grave content in the knowledge that the world is in no worse hands than it's ever been. Bah humbug back atcha.



The Express:

Unfortunately one of its most egregious and blatant lies has stuck and is now part of the culture. Everyone knows about how Loony Left Lambaeth banned 'Baa Baa Black Sheep'. Problem is - it never did. As Paul Foot conclusively showed, the Express simply made it up.

Mo surprise, though, from the paper which, in its time, actively supported Hitler, Franco and Mosley.

<>

My my, that must be some collection of press clippings you keep there

At least mine are dignified by the lessons of history. The Express's support for fascism is a matter of record. For example - Churchill was concerned about it. On the other hand, the Telegraph's nonsense about children being demonised for not eating up their curry is tawdry fiction. Agreed?

Only a mug would fall for it.

Yup, it's sensationalist. It's what the media do.

What's ridiculous is when basic good sense in dealing with infants becomes codified and laid down in guidelines. Do nursery teachers really need to be told to stamp out racist catcalling? What about the bignoses? Do they not need protecting? And the nonsense about reporting incidents to councils. Is there going to be a file kept on 4 year olds now?

Another charity trying to look important.

"Do nursery teachers really need to be told to stamp out racist catcalling?"

Based on my experience, I'd say yes.

Well just sack the buggers then. If they're too stupid to realise it's wrong without guidelines and booklets, they shouldn't be allowed within a mile of kids.

Funny how someone who is regualrly suckered by inflamatory stories from well none pedallers of baseless and inflamatory has the gall to call other people stupid.

They are not all stupid but when people around you and the media you are meant to be able to trust to attempt to tell the actually deliberately misinform you at every turn because it sells more papers then a little might be required for the easily duped. Judging by this thread and the way it was atarted there are a lot of them about. Moreover it cant hurt to have guidance on how to deal with what is a difficult and sensitive subject.

Most people still get it wrong, talking about race as if it is a real thing and not a false concept base upon superficial differences or believing that people belong to a culture orthat aculture belongsto a people or person because of how they look or where they come from.

Its claer that a lot of people have a very distorted picture of the reality of ethnicity and how diversity is not a problem until we make it one.

one love

What's your problem with it, SWL. Go on - spill. Be honest, now.

My perception is that yout knee starts twitching at any mention of anti-racism. I might be wrong - but that's just how it seems to an innocent outsider.

Here's a thought, though: which is a bigger societal problem: racism or noseism? For example...do we often here of violnce against the nsally impressive? Or of bignoses having difficulty in accessing well paid jobs?

Ger real, guy. Start living in the same world as the rest of us where racism *is* a problem and has to be nipped in the bud as early as possible. It seems to me that this is best achieved through the pain free method of education. Hence the guidelines you object to.

Is there such a thing as inherent racism? If so is it a taught response or a reactive one? It’s been stated that kids are colour/religious/disability blind so at what point and why do things start changing?

I was brought up on tough council estates around Merseyside and believe it or not, until I was into my late teens, I didn’t realise there was any animosity between Catholics and Protestants. Somebody on the building site I was labouring on explained the debris in the road following the Orange Order parade. I didn’t know that Liverpool FC was Protestant and Everton Catholic. Not that I cared much then or now.

Merseyside has always been multi-racial with sizable populations of Chinese, Nigerians, Ghanaians, Lascars, Irish and Welsh so seeing different coloured faces and hearing different languages was the norm rather than the exception.

But I do react negatively to the racially as well as politically correct hoops we all have to jump through nowadays, to protect sensitivities. Probably as I do not see the reasons for the hoop jumping, which in turn stems from my upbringing and globe trotting.

If you choose to move into a society or seek refuge within that society isn’t there a quid pro quo to adjust your views and sensitivities rather than vice versa. If you are born into that society isn’t there a responsibility on parents and elders to educate you in the ways and mores of your environment. And before anybody jumps down my throat I am not arguing for a forelock tugging, know your place ex-colonial pecking order.

>But I do react negatively to the racially as well as politically correct hoops we all have to jump through nowadays, to protect sensitivities.<

What a funny hoop jumping life you do lead then WA.

I have found that all this hoop jumping as it is disparagingly referred to is more a product of tabloid hysteria, playing on the panic of overly frightened fragile butterflies, as I have referred to them earlier.

In *real life* hoop jumping is really a fairly minor thing; and when it does happen its for very good reasons of encouraging genuine respect, learning and education about 'difference', be it cultural, about disability, sexual orientation etc. And I speak as someone living in a very diverse area in all sorts of ways, as I have referred to.

WA would you care to specify a few examples of all these hoops you have been forced to jump through personally. You know it would be so much more helpful for discussion to give a few concrete examples rather than just throw around vague emotive phrases, such as the tabloids delight in. That's what I was always taught at school. If you want to argue your case seriously and convincingly *always* give hard factual examples.

WA:

Of *course* racism isn't inherent. One deludeed contributor to this therad once posted what he took as sevidence that it is, a study saying that wood-boring wasps tend share food with genetically-relate members iof their species before others. But - leaving aside that fact thet we aren't wasps anyway - tha fact that kin relationships are strong in no way suggests that there must be animosity with non-kin. Does it?

Think about it in terms of evolution. Sure, two adjacent groups of hominids may, depending on the state of local resources, either interbreed or compete (violently) for resources. But you know what? Those groups would be as near as dammit be genetically identical. How, then, can racism evolve? Where issues of (eg) skin colour and culture rub up against one another are in the very short timsescales where one culture migrates into another. No significant eveolutionary change happens over such timescales. End of.



I am also from The Peoples Republic of Merseyside, btw. (Am I right in recalling that you're from Lydiate or therabouts)? I am slightly more cautious, though, about claiming it as a multicultural harmony. Some counterfacts:
- About the last North Western city to acquire a decent-sized Asian population.
- Post WW-II companies like The Blue Funnel Line laid off en masse the Chinese seamen on whom they were dependent during the war. Only masive strike action prevented their deportation.
- A proud history of 200 years of a black community (Somali sailors)...but largely confined to Liverpool 8 until the Insurrections of the 1980s.
- The first black mayoress hounded out of office (in the late 80s) because of a history of 'prostitution' - actually trumped-up charges against a black woman who had the temerity to have a sex life.
Think on, la.

And like Effers...I'm not at all sure what these hoops are we have to jump through. Non-Mail/Express examples, please. Lies, damn lies and gullible readers of fascist newspapers.

I was born and bred in Birkenhead and served my time with Blue Funnel. In the latest Reith Lectures Blue Flu were stated as the main reason for the large Chinese comunity in Liverpool.

What I'm digging away at is why otherwise rational, educated and intelligent people, often with no experience of other nationalities, except the two weeks in Benidorm or a week's golf in the Algarve, at the drop of a hat, show themselves to be racist, often using quite extreme language.

Apart from spurious articles in the tabloids I think the racial equality hoop that dictates the broadcast and print media, including the advertising media, are required to depict society as being racially equal when in fact, as I stated earlier, it is 90% white.

I'm getting pretty fed up WA with your continual claims that sound just like they've been lifted from the right wing gutter press. You provide no references to your claims. Like the tabloids you just give vague generalisations.

>Apart from spurious articles in the tabloids I think the racial equality hoop that dictates the broadcast and print media, including the advertising media, are required to depict society as being racially equal when in fact, as I stated earlier, it is 90% white.

Is this your idea of a hard concrete facts of your personal hoop jumping that I asked you for? Please give a refernce to where it clearly states that advertising media have to depict society as 50/50. I certainly don't see that in the advertising I am subjected to.

You convince no-one of your POV with this style of argument, and you'd deserve to fail any exam for arguing your case in this way. All you do is make me think you just drink in what tabloids tell you, without proper rigorous reflection, and without comparing it to your own personal experience. So come on give us some hard examples with proper detailed explanation, about all these hoops you say you have to jump through.

Agreed the meeja disproportionately fail to reflect thae 90% white society. BUT: what concrete harm is caused by this promotion of divesrity as an everyday, urban reality? What hoop is the consumer of advertising being forced to jump through? In what way are the 90% less-attractively-hued disadvantaged by greater access to the diversity they would otherwise lack?

And, yes...Blue Funnel et al were responsible for Chinese settlement. But let's not pretend that this was altruistic. It was economic necessity. As soon as possible, the immigrant workforce was dumped.

(Half my family worked for Blue Flue also)

Oops. Missed a phrase.

Agreed the meeja disproportionately fail to reflect thae 90% white society. But not by much.