Maria Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 I'm not sure I'm reading this right, are people saying that mocking someone because they're ginger or freckly is the same as calling people black b******s?? Is there a history of ginger people being opressed by slavery and discrimination? Have they had to fight for equal rights? I'm not sure if you're saying it was that Mercer guys defense or if people are making the observation themselves. Far too tired to make any sense of it Erm, there's a fair few Irish people who have red (ginger) hair, and the Irish have suffered their share of discrimination (in the UK anyway - and suffered slavery type conditions when employed like navvies)......when my Dad came to England he was faced with lodgings saying 'No dogs, No Irish, No blacks'. I don't think it's right to criticise anyone based on what they looked like...... Having said that, when I was a child I really wanted a golly but instead I got a black doll. She was my most favourite toy ever, and I called her Susan after the adopted daughter of the lady next door (who was my friend). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nouggatti Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 (edited) Erm, there's a fair few Irish people who have red (ginger) hair, and the Irish have suffered their share of discrimination (in the UK anyway - and suffered slavery type conditions when employed like navvies)......when my Dad came to England he was faced with lodgings saying 'No dogs, No Irish, No blacks'. I don't think it's right to criticise anyone based on what they looked like...... Having said that, when I was a child I really wanted a golly but instead I got a black doll. She was my most favourite toy ever, and I called her Susan after the adopted daughter of the lady next door (who was my friend). I think it was all Irish regardless of their hair color There are loads of different forms of discrimination imo, around us every day. I had a job interview last time I was jobhunting, and in one interview, (important point I live approx 50 miles from where i work) the interviewee said "look given where you live, that you're married, you obviously have kids (I don't) tell me how you manage your work, and your family commitments" That to me is discrimination albeit misinformed discrimination, it's pure ignorance. It's like the States at the same time as the UK had their no blacks, no irish, no dogs, they had their obsession with WOPS (without papers) and the situation in the Southern States. Edited March 18, 2007 by nouggatti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherlock Bones Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 I think it was all Irish regardless of their hair color talking of that and at the risk of going slightly o/t again, i recently did a bit more of my family history and discovered they lived in a slum area of southwark, which according to the records was occupied solely by "Irish Cockneys". I have no idea what an Irish Cockney sounded like but we figured that the Irish accent at the time was very very strong as the surname Andrews was heard by the census enumerator in 1881 as Handrews. It took me ages to put on a false broad irish accent to explain to my aunt why it was spelt with an H not an A. It was a very bad irish accent. However it did prove what we thought, that we lived in crap areas as Irish immigrants. I had a job interview last time I was jobhunting, and in one interview, (important point I live approx 50 miles from where i work) the interviewee said "look given where you live, that you're married, you obviously have kids (I don't) tell me how you manage your work, and your family commitments" That to me is discrimination albeit misinformed discrimination, it's pure ignorance. T over here we can't say that without getting sued. You never never never discuss marital status, kids or how as a woman anyone copes. I certainly wouldn't dare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nouggatti Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 (edited) T over here we can't say that without getting sued. You never never never discuss marital status, kids or how as a woman anyone copes. I certainly wouldn't dare. Nor can you here, the rules for the Uk and Ireland are identical I couldn't sue as a. it was a one on one interview so no independant witnesses, and b. they offered me the job. I turned down the role and reported the salient points to their HR director and advised they spend some cash on interview training techniques for their staff, as otherwise they would find themselves being sued at some point. She was literally speechless down the phone and apologised profusely. I was UTTERLY gobsmacked in the interview, that he would go so far as to presume I had kids, and turn that into my status quo so to speak. Rather unfortunately the individual concerned is a member of a professional group I attend so I see him minimum once a month, he's always been civil, so perhaps his misdemeanour in relation to my interview has not been directly attributed to me. Does the Handrews explain the big gap you were trying to resolve?? Get your aunt on the phone to me and I will do the right accent to make it sound Handrews as opposed to Andrews lol Edited March 18, 2007 by nouggatti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherlock Bones Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 they know where they stand on discrimination then? It closed one gap but unfortunately meant that it took us back to around 1860 -1870 in Ireland... and we understand the records from that date are lost... so we're pretty stuffed at the mo, your online records are dire in comparison to ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nouggatti Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 they know where they stand on discrimination then? It closed one gap but unfortunately meant that it took us back to around 1860 -1870 in Ireland... and we understand the records from that date are lost... so we're pretty stuffed at the mo, your online records are dire in comparison to ours. The HR woman does now lol That said was glad to have a good excuse not to work for them they have a pretty high attrition rate and a fairly bad rep in the industry in terms of how they treat their staff. Our online records are crap, BUT I am currently working on a project close to Lombard St. in Dublin which is where the registry of births deaths and marriages is held, so if you send me the details I will toddle on in there on lunch some day and get the stuff they have if there is anything. Their records go back an age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simikins Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Pc brigade are the people who stir things up, my "brown" friend [she will punch anyone who calls her coloured, she is not black, she is brown, her words, and tbh her skin is light brown], gets really annoyed with them, i have a golly badge somewhere, but as a child was scared to death by gollies [ think they reminded me of the black and white minstrals *shudder*]. My middle child is a redhead, and believe me he has been picked on over this since he started school, and as OH used to be in the armed forces, my kids have been to a lot of schools all over the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suzeanna Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 The thing that strikes me the most is that the majority of the time, the people who are complain aren't black, or Muslim, or whoever is supposedly finding things offensive, but white middleclass *politically correct* types. That school which tried to change the Three Little Pigs story into Three Little Puppies (and was overruled) obviously is unaware that Muslims consider dogs to be unclean, and would have not been impressed by that either. A lot of people (not including me, I never could see what was funny about him) thought that Ali G was hilarious...a white Jewish man, pretending to be black. If gollies are offensive, surely so was he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslass Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 The thing that strikes me the most is that the majority of the time, the people who are complain aren't black, or Muslim, or whoever is supposedly finding things offensive, but white middleclass *politically correct* types. That school which tried to change the Three Little Pigs story into Three Little Puppies (and was overruled) obviously is unaware that Muslims consider dogs to be unclean, and would have not been impressed by that either. A lot of people (not including me, I never could see what was funny about him) thought that Ali G was hilarious...a white Jewish man, pretending to be black. If gollies are offensive, surely so was he? I also groan every time I read about the much maligned Enid Blyton books with their racist overtones. Well, maybe I was very stupid, but I never once made a connection between gollies, black people and badness. Gollies were playthings, just as teddies and dolls were, and I didn't throw out my golly badges because I suddenly made an association between black toys and baddies. The British white middle classes have a lot to answer for; they are fond of neat boxes which must be ticked. Slightly off-topic, but yesterday I heard an announcer say that so and so (wasn't listening properly) was the first black man to win such and such a competition/race/event. So what? We are obsessed by skin colour in this country. Is the colour of his skin significant? My sister and my brother (both of Asian descent) have been called black and they don't understand it. They are Scots, and brown, if anything. I have a lot of Irish blood in me, and while that is interesting, it doesn't define me. People don't come up to me and say "where are you from?" which has happened to my siblings. Did anyone see Hardeep Singh on TV recently? He does a street poll where he goes up to people and says (in his strong Edinburgh accent, and wearing his trademark kilt and turban) - where do you think I'm from? People struggle to identify his roots, staring at him, and offering suggestions from Afghanistan to India. He says it's rare for anyone to say "Scotland". Liz. ps I should have said Hardeep Singh Kohli, of course. Liz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kats inc Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Me and my ex used to laugh about all this.He is a black man born and bred in Manchester whereas I am white and my parents were living in Africa when Mum became pregnant with me.They came home when she was 6 months pregnant.We used to joke that I was far more African than he was but if we'd done a street poll I would stake money that almost 100% of people would name him as the more African.He was by heritage but not by birth. Also we used to talk about if we had kids what would they be called...mixed race/mixed heritage/mixed parentage whatever the current in vogue phrase is.I remember him saying 'oh just call them half-caste' but then having a conversation that he could use that phrase as he is black but that I couldn't as I am white.It's a mad mad world we live in these days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslass Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Me and my ex used to laugh about all this.He is a black man born and bred in Manchester whereas I am white and my parents were living in Africa when Mum became pregnant with me.They came home when she was 6 months pregnant.We used to joke that I was far more African than he was but if we'd done a street poll I would stake money that almost 100% of people would name him as the more African.He was by heritage but not by birth.Also we used to talk about if we had kids what would they be called...mixed race/mixed heritage/mixed parentage whatever the current in vogue phrase is.I remember him saying 'oh just call them half-caste' but then having a conversation that he could use that phrase as he is black but that I couldn't as I am white.It's a mad mad world we live in these days Too true. My brother and sister can't understand why people keep worrying about their cultural background either - if they were up for adoption nowadays, there would be no chance our family would have been allowed to adopt. I've droned on about this before, but it's always assumed that so-called trans-racially adopted children need to have their identity confirmed by exposure to their "own" culture. I'd like to have seen Glasgow social workers (no harm to social workers; it's the legislation to blame) attempt to match one child from a Scots Pakistani/Christian background and another from a Scots Indian/Hindu background with...well...anyone! Considering the children's birth families already thought of themselves as Scots (which we have had confirmed), why would we, as the adoptive family, feel we had to impose cultural stereotypes on those same children? It's all very patronising, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kats inc Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Yes.We had a beautiful baby girl who was going for adoption.Essentially she was white but she had a mongolian blue spot which the powers that be determined meant she must have travelling family/Irish ancestry somewhere in her past (as they are the only white people that can have mongolian blue spots).Because of this they thought she was best off not being adopted by a white family so she sat in foster care and was still there at the age of 2 yrs old when I left that area.Absolutely ridiculous.A family missed out on a beautiful little baby girl and she missed out on being placed with adoptive parents as a young baby She was truly the only baby I was ever tempted to adopt myself and if I hadn't been so involved in her family,removal into local authority care and court cases I might have thought about it seriously.But I am celtic so I doubt I'd have even got a look in Stupid stupid rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslass Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Yes.We had a beautiful baby girl who was going for adoption.Essentially she was white but she had a mongolian blue spot which the powers that be determined meant she must have travelling family/Irish ancestry somewhere in her past (as they are the only white people that can have mongolian blue spots).Because of this they thought she was best off not being adopted by a white family so she sat in foster care and was still there at the age of 2 yrs old when I left that area.Absolutely ridiculous.A family missed out on a beautiful little baby girl and she missed out on being placed with adoptive parents as a young baby She was truly the only baby I was ever tempted to adopt myself and if I hadn't been so involved in her family,removal into local authority care and court cases I might have thought about it seriously.But I am celtic so I doubt I'd have even got a look in Stupid stupid rules. Poor poor baby. I'm sure she just needed a mummy, and wouldn't have cared what colour her skin was. It must have been unbearable to stand by and see that happen. My own brother had languished in a 1960s "orphanage" for his first year while they tried to find him a home suitable for his colour and background, so he was taken at the age of 12 months from the only home he'd ever known, terrified and helpless, and handed over to my parents whom he'd never met. I was 20 at the time and I still weep to think of our poor little brother in those heart-breaking early days. I often wonder what alien visitors would make of us? There we are, examining each little body to see what colour it is, whether its family has a background of worshipping one deity rather than another, before deciding which family group it can safely be assigned to. We are absolutely mad. I have another example - and I know we've strayed from gollies, but it all stems from our society's enthusiasm for colour distinctions. Between my adopted brother and sister, my parents fostered a baby whose background was completely unknown. She had been abandoned in a city station, with a little gold cross round her neck, a few clothes, and some food. The authorities decided that she was most likely southern European, because of her olive skin and the cross, and therefore it was permissible for a white family to adopt her. Many months later (sadly for us, because my parents were on the point of adopting her), her mother turned up. She was an English Pakistani/Muslim girl and the father was Pakistani/Muslim too - the child was simply light-skinned and the mother had put the cross on her, she said, to try to find her a caring home and so people wouldn't be prejudiced. Left to their own devices, the authorities would have assigned the child to a white Christian identity, because the assessment of her needs depended entirely on appearance. The question is, would it have made any difference to the baby's happiness either way, as long she was placed in a loving, secure, happy home? Liz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tisaann Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 3 weeks ago I had a discussion at work with a fellow worker of mine and we were discussing the word 'wogs'. It came about because my Dad has been banned from my sister in laws house for using this word to discribe black people. My friend was horrified that he had used this word and had every sympathy with my sister in law. I agreed with her up to a point and explained that my dad was elderly and that in his day this had been a word that was often used, good or bad and that he had been out of this country for countless years and was not aware that many of the words from yester years were no longer acceptable in this day and age and that he proberbly never even realised that he had used it. This was on the friday. On the monday my friend came to me and said that on the Sunday at a store where she worked part time, she and another workmate were talking 'patwa' (sp?) (she's black, he's white) a workmate on hearing them said " I really hate it when white people try to speak like wogs" she was shocked but only because we had been talking about this just day's before but the white bloke was offended because he was married to a black lady. He was so offended that he put in a formal complaint and the co worker has been suspended. My friend was asked for her version of what happened which she gave and then also said that she honestly thought that it was a 'throw away remark' which was said without any malace or thought and that in no way did she want this co worker sacked for saying this word, she wasn't offended by it (our talk had given her food for thought) she was just shocked to hear it so soon after we had discussed it. After this I looked up the word on Wikapedia and it bears no relation to insulting black people. I think that we have become a nation that 'treads on glass' not because XY & Z complains about it but because the media has a great big wooden spoon and will stir up trouble and in any way shape or form to sell newspapers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimthecat Posted March 20, 2007 Report Share Posted March 20, 2007 (JoC @ Mar 17 2007, 12:30 AM) I'm not sure I'm reading this right, are people saying that mocking someone because they're ginger or freckly is the same as calling people black b******s?? Is there a history of ginger people being opressed by slavery and discrimination? Have they had to fight for equal rights? I don't think it's right to criticise anyone based on what they looked like...... Maria , absolutely. Abuse is abuse regardless and being made to feel inferior is not less hurtful or demeaning to that person with ginger hair because they weren't oppressed in the past. Jo , being ridiculed can rob people of their confidence. If you have ever been hurt by comments about your appearance or looks then understand that comments hurt red heads the same. Alison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts