-isms....... Why Are Some Acceptable And Others Not?

[ClazUK]

When you meet someone else that is doing you no harm, just say to yourself, "I will be polite".

I really like this. If the world lived as simply as this, how much easier would life be?

[Rudi]

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

 

I know you didn't mean anything, I really do I was quite taken by surprise with how strongly it made me feel and how it must ten times worse be for people who have to put up with prejudice about things they can't even change about themselves.

 

I think that everyone has prejudices and biases. I can't explain properly, but I don't think it's wrong to feel it as such, because we are what we are. But it's what you do with it. It's acknowledging that what you feel IS a prejudice and being honest about it and being aware of how you behave towards people as individuals that is what counts.

 

My grandma said that I should always treat people as I would like to be treated and that's how I 'try' to behave, don't always succeed, obviously!

[scotslass]

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.

 

But some people would disagree about the non-consensual factor. Also, if I see a woman "enjoying" being led around in public on a lead, why aren't my reactions as valid as her right to be treated like a dog? I feel bad for her. If it's purely a sexual thrill for her, then is it appropriate in public? (oh, s***, I sound prim now )

 

 

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 think that's probably very true. None of us are perfect.

 

But the word 'abuse' is one we use for things we disapprove of in sufficient numbers for it to be enshrined in law. That's all. Someone somewhere is always making decisions about what is ok and what isn't. How has it been decided that 16 is the cut-off age for permitted sexual activity, for example? I think it should probably be later than that, and most people may think it should be earlier. That's all I meant. I abhor both paedophilia and animal abuse, but someone somewhere will see me as intolerant and unenlightened.

 

 

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

 

However... it may be that someone else is not harming you, but potentially harming someone else more vulnerable. Or doesn't that matter? You are an adult with your own opinion and world view - but would you, for example, be happy to see your little girl pass a couple where the girl was being led by a dog lead? Is that the kind of strong female persona you want her to aim for? (That's a straight question - I suspect your answer will be that you are happy for her to be whatever she wants - in which case, I'd say - just wait till you have kids. )

 

I agree about politeness. That, and kindness.

[ClazUK]

But some people would disagree about the non-consensual factor.

Can you enlarge on this? I'm not too sure if you are referring to the kids/animals/dead body thing or the Dewsbury Goths.

 

Also, if I see a woman "enjoying" being led around in public on a lead, why aren't my reactions as valid as her right to be treated like a dog? I feel bad for her. If it's purely a sexual thrill for her, then is it appropriate in public? (oh, s***, I sound prim now )

There is a difference between a sexual thrill and a lifestyle choice. I hope you'd not be horrified for your children to see gay men holding hands? That is an outward (and non-offensive IMHO) display they they are in a relationship that just happens to be gay. The Dewsbury couple are doing no more than that, however bizarre it may seem to the outside world. The collar/lead thing is a symbol of ownership/commitment to them, not unlike our conventional wedding rings.

 

Don't feel bad for her - I followed the story and saw a couple of interviews with her - she seems very happy in the relationship. Not all women want the equality that we percieve as 'normal' nowadays.

 

Personally I find them a bit odd, but I'd fight for their right to live as they wish, without harrassment and bigotry.

[krusewalker]

I can honestly that my be polite to the person thing would kick in and i would say nowt in front of them, and just think if that sort of thing makes them happy, fair play.

But i was bought up in NZ, maybe that makes a difference???.

I would certainly tell my kids off if they were rude in front of them too.

But once gone, if im honest, I would probably have a little giggle, and probably make some stupid comment or other..and probably giggle if my kids did so.

But my kids would have learnt not to be rude to strangers, and associate the scene light-heartedly. No harmful lasting impression then left.

If i apporached the whole thing too seriously and made a big awareness issue out of it, I would freak my poor girl out. That is more likely to make the image she has just seen linger long term and traumatise her.

But i dont want that. She's a kid and should be thinking like a kid.

If my girl were very small, she wouldnt understand anyway.

 

This reminds me of that classic South Park episode when the kids got berated by the black chef (as played by Isaac Hayes) and several hysterical school board PC awareness aparatchiks and freaked out parents, as they had drawn a flag with some white stick men stringing up a black stick man. It was some school asssignment or other to do with local history.

Kenny and co went got all rebelious and protested their freedom of expression under the constitition to make this flag.

Then after all this hysteria subsided, chef suddenly realised that Kenny and co had no awareness of the symbolism of the black and white colours, and that they thought they were actually getting banned for drawing pictures of men hanging from trees!!!

Chef was horrified that he had introduced the concepts of racism, prejudice and diferences between people, when they didnt even notice the different colours.

The show ends with chef joining kenny and co in a ceremony infurling their flag which now featured several white black green and red stick men hanging a black stick man from a tree.

Top satire.

[ranirottie]

well I am definately not homophobic because being in the horsey world you come across a lot of gay people and my most important reason is that one of my sons is gay. But I dare say I do have some isms altho I cant think of any at the moment. Anything that adults mutually consent to is ok in my book as long as it isnt totally against public decency.There must be something that I am against but nothing springs to mind .x

Edited June 12, 2008 by ranirottie

[laura g]

You are an adult with your own opinion and world view - but would you, for example, be happy to see your little girl pass a couple where the girl was being led by a dog lead? Is that the kind of strong female persona you want her to aim for? (That's a straight question - I suspect your answer will be that you are happy for her to be whatever she wants - in which case, I'd say - just wait till you have kids. )

 

I agree about politeness. That, and kindness.

 

Proof that different eyes see different things. reading the goth story I didn't see a weak female. Rather the opposite in fact.

 

I actually saw it more as a fashion statement. The things you when you're young etc etc. But then i worry that that's the kind of remark that makes me ageist!

 

The bus company's reply made me giggle. How can you discount it for being dangerous when braking if it's ok to have dogs on buses? They need to think of something better than that!

[scotslass]

Can you enlarge on this? I'm not too sure if you are referring to the kids/animals/dead body thing or the Dewsbury Goths.

 

 

There is a difference between a sexual thrill and a lifestyle choice. I hope you'd not be horrified for your children to see gay men holding hands? That is an outward (and non-offensive IMHO) display they they are in a relationship that just happens to be gay. The Dewsbury couple are doing no more than that, however bizarre it may seem to the outside world. The collar/lead thing is a symbol of ownership/commitment to them, not unlike our conventional wedding rings.

 

Don't feel bad for her - I followed the story and saw a couple of interviews with her - she seems very happy in the relationship. Not all women want the equality that we percieve as 'normal' nowadays.

 

Personally I find them a bit odd, but I'd fight for their right to live as they wish, without harrassment and bigotry.

 

I meant that paedophiles excused their behaviour, as do people who sexually abuse their animals. They'll maintain that the children and animals - whom we perceive as victims - are in fact willing participants. As for the goths - I guess it's just fun and fashion to them, with a bit of free publicity thrown in. Having had me tea and a think, I'm not inclined to get worked up about them. If I thought wearing my wedding ring implied my OH's ownership of me, I'd be sick. Commitment, yes; ownership? - not on your life.

 

My 'children' (who are adults), are used to seeing gay people holding hands, I'm sure. I'm not sure that they'd feel that holding hands was the same as one partner being led, doglike, by another, but maybe that's just me. I'll ask my ex-goth daughter.

 

 

Proof that different eyes see different things. reading the goth story I didn't see a weak female. Rather the opposite in fact.

 

I actually saw it more as a fashion statement. The things you when you're young etc etc. But then i worry that that's the kind of remark that makes me ageist!

 

The bus company's reply made me giggle. How can you discount it for being dangerous when braking if it's ok to have dogs on buses? They need to think of something better than that!

 

I suppose I just see symbolism where others don't. I sometimes take things too seriously.

[scotslass]

I can honestly that my be polite to the person thing would kick in and i would say nowt in front of them, and just think if that sort of thing makes them happy, fair play.

But i was bought up in NZ, maybe that makes a difference???.

I would certainly tell my kids off if they were rude in front of them too.

But once gone, if im honest, I would probably have a little giggle, and probably make some stupid comment or other..and probably giggle if my kids did so.

 

Y'know, you don't always come across as a polite and tolerant person, Krusewalker. I could swear I heard you say something less than flattering about Catholics and Protestants on another thread.

 

But, let's get this right...it's ok to laugh behind people's backs as long as you're "polite" to their faces? Hmm. How is that teaching your child to be accepting of others?

[krusewalker]

on the subject of politeness, a laughing smiley doesnt magic up some where there wasnt any.

so we're both damned.

[ingipops]

lets try and keep this thread on track folks

[laura g]

But, let's get this right...it's ok to laugh behind people's backs as long as you're "polite" to their faces? Hmm. How is that teaching your child to be accepting of others?

 

But can you honestly say you've never quietly laughed at someone although you wouldnt in a million years dream of doing it to their face?

 

The biggest challenge we have with our kids is teaching them that, between black and white - or right and wrong - there is every shade of grey imagineable.

 

We saw all sorts in our shops. The children learned to be welcoming, polite, helpful, accepting, patient etc etc. And non judgemental too.

 

Didn't mean they didn't laugh their socks off in private family time later on. They learned that there is a time and a place.

 

And, btw. As a family we practice equality in what we find funny! Let's be honest, if you've quite a black sense of humour, there's humour to be found in most things.

[ReikiAnge]

Proof that different eyes see different things. reading the goth story I didn't see a weak female. Rather the opposite in fact.

 

Given he sorts her food and cleans the house, me too! How often do we read about men who expect their male partners to do all that after work?

 

The bus company's reply made me giggle. How can you discount it for being dangerous when braking if it's ok to have dogs on buses? They need to think of something better than that!

 

I thought the same thing

 

I can't say I wouldn't look at someone being led by a lead if I saw them in the street but it would be interest and curiousity for sure, nothing sinister. There are far too many horrid things in the world to worry about people's personal choices (provided they're not harming anyone else of course).

 

But can you honestly say you've never quietly laughed at someone although you wouldnt in a million years dream of doing it to their face?

 

No I can't

[scotslass]

on the subject of politeness, a laughing smiley doesnt magic up some where there wasnt any.

so we're both damned.

 

Agreed. But I never claimed to be polite.

 

 

But can you honestly say you've never quietly laughed at someone although you wouldnt in a million years dream of doing it to their face?

 

The biggest challenge we have with our kids is teaching them that, between black and white - or right and wrong - there is every shade of grey imagineable.

 

We saw all sorts in our shops. The children learned to be welcoming, polite, helpful, accepting, patient etc etc. And non judgemental too.

 

Didn't mean they didn't laugh their socks off in private family time later on. They learned that there is a time and a place.

 

And, btw. As a family we practice equality in what we find funny! Let's be honest, if you've quite a black sense of humour, there's humour to be found in most things.

 

Yes, of course I have. I laugh at people (including myself) all the time, and not even quietly.

 

I too grew up in shops, as it were, and I agree it's a great learning environment, but I still don't understand why its ok to laugh at people's beliefs, life styles, etc, even behind their backs. Let's take a real example - when I told my kids that so-and-so liked to wear women's clothes, even though he was a man, and that they must be kind/polite to him even though the other kids in the village laughed at him, wouldn't I have been a bit hypocritical if I'd then enjoyed a family laugh at his expense over the dinner table?

 

I'm going to leave this thread now; as always I find it hard to convey what I feel on here. I really should stay out of contro.

[krusewalker]

But can you honestly say you've never quietly laughed at someone although you wouldnt in a million years dream of doing it to their face?

 

The biggest challenge we have with our kids is teaching them that, between black and white - or right and wrong - there is every shade of grey imagineable.

 

We saw all sorts in our shops. The children learned to be welcoming, polite, helpful, accepting, patient etc etc. And non judgemental too.

 

Didn't mean they didn't laugh their socks off in private family time later on. They learned that there is a time and a place.

 

And, btw. As a family we practice equality in what we find funny! Let's be honest, if you've quite a black sense of humour, there's humour to be found in most things.

 

To be fair, Scotslass did make a brilliant point, and it did make me sit up and give it some serious thought.

I just lost the will to post my thoughts after i read her first sentence directed at myself. Not due to feeling wounded. It's just that i value very much a good challenging debate and the opportunities they give to learn and understand.

So these days i instantly lose interest in any thread or post(er) as soon as anything personal is entered. If i dont, i just get annoyed, and lose any of the benefit i have already gained.

But if i had the strength to overcome that weakness and had just stuck to a reply to scotsclass's excellent point, i would have said exactly as you have, except not quite as well.