ClazUK Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I posted this on Anges thread about homophobic remarks but I think I killed the thread a bit, and took it a tad off topic, so I've brought it here. Incidentally, since I posted on the thread, over 40 additional people have read it but no-one's commented. It might be because I'm incredibly boring, but I think it's partly because we are all guilty of it; I know I have been in the past, although I try to check myself nowadays. My post: Can't believe that comment was made its terrible that so many people still cant understand others that dont fit in their idea of 'normal'. Signed - can't stand discrimination, bigotry, bullying etc I totally agree and will sign too, but there are still huge gaps with what is ok in the laws on harassment and what isn't. It's ok to be bigoted to cross dressers, transexuals, the BDSM community, adult 'babies'.... I could go on...... just look at the furore around these two in the media recently: Dewsbury Goths article and Max Mosley: Max Mosley article How many innocent peoples lives get ruined by this hypocritical split between what is acceptable harrassment and what isn't? Why the hell anyones sexuality, as long as it is consensual, should be a matter for contempt and bullying is beyond me, yet we accept it and, sadly, are probably a part of it on a regular basis. Sorry, I've gone a bit off topic there, but I see this divide growing by the day, and it worries me. So, and I ask this in a non-confrontational way, as I really love to know how people think: Do you think homophobia is dreadful but think it's okay to take the mickey out of, say, a transvestite? If so, why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snow Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 Well I used to sit on the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, transvestite hate crimes forum along with the police and other representatives of different groups who worked with these issues, and I have to say that despite the fact we were all there because of the hate crimes, and bias against each and every one of those groups - they ALL without exception exhibited "isms" about each other Exactly the same as the race hate crime forum I sat on and the sexual violence forum - each group was up in arms about the bigotry and stereotyping of their own race, gender, sexual preference etc. yet couldn't/wouldn't see they had exactly the same bigotry and stereo typical views of anyone who wasn't "like them" - this was precisely why the forums were set up in the first place but we never really did manage to get away from the fighting, blaming and "ism issues" completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.eyed.dog Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 TBH. I think I would rather keep my views on this private. Maybe, others think the same. I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOB Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I think it is all wrong but we are all guilty in some way. It's human nature. My hubby is fattist, although he is well over weight himself, I really get on my high horse about single parent on benefits not being able to afford the correct food for their children etc, although we both work happily alongside homosexuals and I work with a transexual. I do not believe that any of us are truely impartial no matter how hard we strive for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClazUK Posted June 12, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I do not believe that any of us are truely impartial no matter how hard we strive for it. I think you're absolutely right. Snows post re the Forums was interesting but not a surprise. I just wonder if *we* (a general we) are not homophobic cos it's not currently PC. And I wonder if the time will come when other groups get the same protection as gay people. Somehow I doubt it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudi Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I think it is all wrong but we are all guilty in some way. It's human nature. My hubby is fattist I know you wouldn't have meant anything by that but it's made me feel really horrible and I'm sitting here thinking, "God what must he have thought of me" when I dropped Bouncer off. It's why I hate meeting new people, I really have to force myself to do things that involve people I don't know. Your husband didn't treat me any differently, but some people do, I can see in their face that they've judged me as lazy and stupid and whatever else. It doesn't happen often, but it's an eye opener when it does because I guess that's how some sections of society must be made to feel on a daily basis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tegk68 Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I'd certainly like to think that I'm not -ism anything. I do try very much to live with the mantra "don't judge a book by it's cover" and that applies to anything and anyone. However i think Bob has made a most honest and valuble post with the statement "I do not believe that any of us are truely impartial no matter how hard we strive for it." And all though I would hate to say so, I can imagine that is the category I probably fall into. Human nature I guess as much as anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacqui d Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 i dont like bullies/abusers or ignorant people, i dont "see" size, sexuality,race or religion, just idividuals i either do or dont like. I do believe this (quote) "I do not believe that any of us are truely impartial no matter how hard we strive for it." to be true though, sadly i think its part of being human Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslass Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I've just read the article about the Goths. One of my 'isms' is feminism, so what worries me about this couple is not her right to wear a dog-collar and be led around like his pet, but his remarks (maybe tongue in cheek but not reported thus) - Mr Graves said: "She's very animal like, she's kind of like a pet, as well as a partner." He said he "does everything" for his girlfriend, including laying out clothes for her, feeding her and cleaning their house. He said: "You wouldn't expect your cat or dog to do the washing up or cleaning round the house." Yuck. On any level, that's ain't funny. To me, that is. It may have other people rolling in the aisles. Total tolerance is impossible. If we accept every form of sexual taste or practice, for example, then we have to accept paedophilia and bestiality. Some adults believe that young children want to be sexual with adults. Some humans believe they have the right to have sexual relations with their pets. Maybe in a hundred years, they'll be so tolerant about that kind of behaviour that people will look back in horror at our narrow-mindedness. But you can bet your bottom dollar they'll have found something else to be intolerant about. Maybe heterosexuality, or something worse, like chocolate-eating. No sooner does one form of apparent tolerance establish itself (towards gay people, say) than other form of intolerance raises its equally ugly head (at the moment, maybe it targets people who practise one religion or another). That's just human nature. We like gangs, tribes, cliques; it makes us feel safe to be among other people who share our views and prejudices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOB Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I know you wouldn't have meant anything by that but it's made me feel really horrible and I'm sitting here thinking, "God what must he have thought of me" when I dropped Bouncer off. It's why I hate meeting new people, I really have to force myself to do things that involve people I don't know. Your husband didn't treat me any differently, but some people do, I can see in their face that they've judged me as lazy and stupid and whatever else. It doesn't happen often, but it's an eye opener when it does because I guess that's how some sections of society must be made to feel on a daily basis Oh Rudi I'm so sorry I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings . I was just trying to be honest - something niggles everyone. You are definately not fat and wouldn't have been considered so by my hubby - his thing is about really big people who can hardly walk. You put yourself out transporting our dog that is definately not lazy or stupid, you are a beautiful kind person Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClazUK Posted June 12, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 If we accept every form of sexual taste or practice, for example, then we have to accept paedophilia and bestiality.I disagree strongly with this. The two you list are non consensual, as is necrophilia. Anything else, done with consent, should be the business of the people partaking and nobody else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReikiAnge Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 Total tolerance is impossible. If we accept every form of sexual taste or practice, for example, then we have to accept paedophilia and bestiality. Some adults believe that young children want to be sexual with adults. Some humans believe they have the right to have sexual relations with their pets. Maybe in a hundred years, they'll be so tolerant about that kind of behaviour that people will look back in horror at our narrow-mindedness. But you can bet your bottom dollar they'll have found something else to be intolerant about. Maybe heterosexuality, or something worse, like chocolate-eating. Claz has given two examples of adults in (presumably) consenting relationships. I wouldn't want to have someone keep me on a lead (although a man to clean the house sounds good) and I feel for the wife of the bloke that slept with prostitutes (although of course she might not mind, I don't know them) but from the info we have, those taking part are adults able to make their own decisions. Accepting this and other relationships/practices which may differ from our idea of the "norm" does not mean we have to accept the abuse of children or animals, or that they are in anyway comparable. IMO. I do not believe that any of us are truely impartial no matter how hard we strive for it. I think that's probably very true. None of us are perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laura g Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 Excellent. This is an interesting one. Do you think homophobia is dreadful but think it's okay to take the mickey out of, say, a transvestite? If so, why? i think discriminating of all typs against all groups is terrible. Although taking the mickey is another thing. I'd never ridicule or discriminate but I cannot say I don't lmao at little britain's only gay in the village or the university 'big fat lesbian/oompaloopa/ching chong chinaman' sketches. Does that make me a bad person? I don't think so and I would feel awful if someone thought less of me for finding that kind of thing funny. We had a cross dresser who used to come in our shop and yes, I did giggle to myself when he'd left. And that was only because he (she? sorry don't know the 'pc' I should be adopting) looked stunning. Was dressed beautifully. But bought 'guns and ammo' type books! seemed a complete contradiction in terms! I've sympathy for Rudi. Over the past couple of years I've put alot of weight on. Good news is that it's coming off now. bad news is that I am very short tempered with people who already are treating me differently. and that goes for strangers as well as friends and family. I'd certainly like to think that I'm not -ism anything. I do try very much to live with the mantra "don't judge a book by it's cover" and that applies to anything and anyone. However i think Bob has made a most honest and valuble post with the statement "I do not believe that any of us are truely impartial no matter how hard we strive for it." And all though I would hate to say so, I can imagine that is the category I probably fall into. Human nature I guess as much as anything. Have ao agree with this. I'm honestly sitting here trying to think about any incidents in which i'm not impartial to a group and really, there's none. I can think of prefernces - ie I have to admit I don't have much truck with Americans. But then that's down to personal experience with the americans I know in the area I know and not 'them' as a whole. Totally wrong but then I guess thats the way all prejudices start, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greyhound pal Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 Well I used to sit on the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, transvestite hate crimes forum along with the police and other representatives of different groups who worked with these issues, and I have to say that despite the fact we were all there because of the hate crimes, and bias against each and every one of those groups - they ALL without exception exhibited "isms" about each other Exactly the same as the race hate crime forum I sat on and the sexual violence forum - each group was up in arms about the bigotry and stereotyping of their own race, gender, sexual preference etc. yet couldn't/wouldn't see they had exactly the same bigotry and stereo typical views of anyone who wasn't "like them" - this was precisely why the forums were set up in the first place but we never really did manage to get away from the fighting, blaming and "ism issues" completely. I totally agree because I have also seen some evidence of this. One of my own huge issues is 'violence against women' forums. The reason being I worked in the first hostel that accepted couples. It was split 50/50 on who was the perpetrator of violence. According to womens groups at the time when I spoke about it showing the stats of violent incidents between couples, it was MY lack of understanding that made me think that way. In other words the man undoubtedly was perpetrating some other form of abuse to make the woman lash out. My theory behind that was that they were shooting their own theories in the foot with that. Tad off topic but just wanted to say in my work life, I too have come across similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krusewalker Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I'd certainly like to think that I'm not -ism anything. I do try very much to live with the mantra "don't judge a book by it's cover" and that applies to anything and anyone. That's the best way to be in my experience. However i think Bob has made a most honest and valuble post with the statement "I do not believe that any of us are truely impartial no matter how hard we strive for it." And all though I would hate to say so, I can imagine that is the category I probably fall into. Human nature I guess as much as anything. And in my experience, the best way to achieve being the best way, as highlighted by tegk68 above, is to accept our own human nature (good and bad) as BOB has said, and then to just get on with it. I cannot say i have ever ideologically policed myself prior to speaking, and I am quite proud that all of my employers have treated us like adults and never felt the need to send us any any such courses. And the thing is, i still have never spoken to anyone with a specific derogatory term, even in anger...although i have been known to call some a******* a*******, canutes, and bankers. So dont worry about this stuff and you will be fine. Expensive diversity training isnt necessary and only achieves the opposite effect of highlighting differences between people and thus creating intolerance/prejudice. When you meet someone else that is doing you no harm, just say to yourself, "I will be polite". That's the only training and awareness anyone really needs. And its free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts