In medieval times, all things were ranked. Everything in heaven and on earth had its place and the structure was layered in a triangle. So, a lion was the king of beasts, and eagle of birds, and so on. The king was the first of men, then princes below him, then ranks of noblemen. I'm not sure where these beliefs originated but females were little regarded. However, another layer of belief comes in here. Women, through Eve, had brought about man's fall and by their attractions, were 'the gateway to Hell'. They also brought salvation: Mary was chosen to bear Christ and presented an ideal of womanhood. Virginity, submission, modesty and sacrifice were the requirements for women. Was this sexism? No. But it was misogyny and together with the notion of rank, it runs right through our culture, even now. Even today, debates about women's roles in life have undercurrents of these ideas about virtue : just look at rape cases, where we examine the victim's history, not the assailant's. Sexism is just a modern term, but the secondary place of women is as old as the hills.
Is there a just cause for prejudice? Here's a thing though - at this time I think people should have 'freedom' in as much as if I want to set up an all male club that should be fine. Ditto for a woman. Ditto for any colour skin. Ditto for any sexual orientation. Ditto for.... So by default those clubs would be seen to be 'ist' wouldn't they? But are they - are they being prejudiced? Lesley Garret (the singer) said a few years ago, at this time of yer, that King's choir should let in girls because they have just as good voices. I don't dispute the quality statement, but if King's wants an all boys choir, shouldn't that be fine - but am I then being prejudiced and 'ist' by saying that? And I find it difficult in my own head to see what line I'm drawing between what I see as 'ist' and what isn't.
I think equality should exist across the board. But then I know I ignore my own ideas. I know that women should be paid the same as men, that conditions for all should be the same, but I'm happy to buy cheap goods and ignore the conditions used in their manufacture. Is that then racist, sexist and every other 'ist' - as I don't care enough about the harm done - and worse, justified and excused by the lame ' a dollar a day is better than nothing' argument. Doesn't that though show power? Hasn't it always been thus? We applaud industry for keeping prices down as they chase cheap labour around the globe and don't care (or not care enough) if it's 'ist' - or at least I do as a hypocrite. But is it any more 'ist' than the act of slavery - just exploitation of the weaker by the more powerful?
Watch the Terry thing - and see if you have doubts about whether it was 'ist' or not. It was an 'ist' statement - not doubted - but was/is Terry 'ist' or just trying wind up Anton and get inside his head.
Obviously the thread has progressed since this reply but I'll try to answer.
Not all ism are negative some may be viewed as positive or neutral depending. Altruism to me would seem positive but may not be to others, individualism could be spun different ways too.
With regard to predudice we form mental decisions based on what we know and often from limited knowledge. If a person had only heard good women singers and poor men they may be predudiced to the idea that women are better singers than men. It could be unstandable though nothing more than a limited opinion. If this person shared this idea then others may challenge and question this position. Discrimination is acting upon that predudice which could be deemed unfair and challenged.
If something wanted an all boy or girl choir then it wouldn't be a crime to do so. Though technically it would sexism if their reason was based upon nothing but sex. Saying black people are better dancers is racist even if it was given as compliment by a non-black.
With regards to John Terry or footballers trying to get into others heads then yes this is a thing. I've played Sunday league, 5 a side league and 'friendly football' and have heard and seen some ill tempered stuff.. to put it mildly( punch ups the lot). Often it was forgotten once the game was over, though if it was more vindictive or personally offensive then it might not be resolved quickly (if at all). I imagine if someone had wound someone up about the death of child for example then it wouldn't be forgotten about there and then. There are limits of what is acceptable, a sincere apology may be a start but at the time John Terry claimed he was just repeating back. Insulting a person about their skin colour is mindless because there's no good reason to do so. . With regards to slavery it is a general form of exploitation and has and does occur through many demographics. In the instance of black slavery it is race based because it was Caucasian Europeans exploiting what they deemed to be inferior Black Africans. While it happened a relatively long time ago the threads of it continued in various ways, such as segregation and having less rights and opportunities. Statistics and experience suggest it still exists and this is why you get movements such as BLM.
Yes many of us are hypocrites and do want cheap products at the expense of others. Sometimes it's just through a disconnect or not thinking about it. This is somewhat understandable though doesn't make it right
Of course minority groups have exploited but two wrongs don't make a right. Most of the power in the world is concentrated in white men the same as it's been for long time. It doesn't mean all white men are bad or they can't be there through merit.To me it's about trying to create something as close to equality as possible while still respecting diversity. It's very complex and there are no easy answers, I just try and put myself in the shoes of others as best I can, and try to be as open minded as possible even if my own predudices are there in the back of my mind trying to judge.
These are obviously my thoughts and feelings, I respect that others may see things differently owing to their experiences. I've seen some social/political conversations get nasty and this one has been civil and people seem to be open minded and respectful so I'm greatful for that. 🙂
The thing is, different races have different characteristics. It is not racism to acknowledge it. If for example you look at a Chinese person and an African person, it's pretty easy to tell which is which.
The thing is, different races have different characteristics. It is not racism to acknowledge it. If for example you look at a Chinese person and an African person, it's pretty easy to tell which is which.
I don't think an acknowledgement of those differences is thought of as racist though. News reports for example use black, white ,Asian and such to describe.
Posts
Gardening in Central Norfolk on improved gritty moraine over chalk ... free-draining.
However, another layer of belief comes in here. Women, through Eve, had brought about man's fall and by their attractions, were 'the gateway to Hell'. They also brought salvation: Mary was chosen to bear Christ and presented an ideal of womanhood. Virginity, submission, modesty and sacrifice were the requirements for women.
Was this sexism? No. But it was misogyny and together with the notion of rank, it runs right through our culture, even now. Even today, debates about women's roles in life have undercurrents of these ideas about virtue : just look at rape cases, where we examine the victim's history, not the assailant's.
Sexism is just a modern term, but the secondary place of women is as old as the hills.
Not all ism are negative some may be viewed as positive or neutral depending. Altruism to me would seem positive but may not be to others, individualism could be spun different ways too.
With regard to predudice we form mental decisions based on what we know and often from limited knowledge. If a person had only heard good women singers and poor men they may be predudiced to the idea that women are better singers than men. It could be unstandable though nothing more than a limited opinion. If this person shared this idea then others may challenge and question this position. Discrimination is acting upon that predudice which could be deemed unfair and challenged.
If something wanted an all boy or girl choir then it wouldn't be a crime to do so. Though technically it would sexism if their reason was based upon nothing but sex. Saying black people are better dancers is racist even if it was given as compliment by a non-black.
With regards to John Terry or footballers trying to get into others heads then yes this is a thing. I've played Sunday league, 5 a side league and 'friendly football' and have heard and seen some ill tempered stuff.. to put it mildly( punch ups the lot). Often it was forgotten once the game was over, though if it was more vindictive or personally offensive then it might not be resolved quickly (if at all). I imagine if someone had wound someone up about the death of child for example then it wouldn't be forgotten about there and then. There are limits of what is acceptable, a sincere apology may be a start but at the time John Terry claimed he was just repeating back. Insulting a person about their skin colour is mindless because there's no good reason to do so.
.
With regards to slavery it is a general form of exploitation and has and does occur through many demographics. In the instance of black slavery it is race based because it was Caucasian Europeans exploiting what they deemed to be inferior Black Africans. While it happened a relatively long time ago the threads of it continued in various ways, such as segregation and having less rights and opportunities. Statistics and experience suggest it still exists and this is why you get movements such as BLM.
Yes many of us are hypocrites and do want cheap products at the expense of others. Sometimes it's just through a disconnect or not thinking about it. This is somewhat understandable though doesn't make it right
Of course minority groups have exploited but two wrongs don't make a right. Most of the power in the world is concentrated in white men the same as it's been for long time. It doesn't mean all white men are bad or they can't be there through merit.To me it's about trying to create something as close to equality as possible while still respecting diversity. It's very complex and there are no easy answers, I just try and put myself in the shoes of others as best I can, and try to be as open minded as possible even if my own predudices are there in the back of my mind trying to judge.
These are obviously my thoughts and feelings, I respect that others may see things differently owing to their experiences. I've seen some social/political conversations get nasty and this one has been civil and people seem to be open minded and respectful so I'm greatful for that. 🙂
This thread should be an advert for the Tory Party.
Maybe i should cut gardeners a bit slack.
After all, i try to be one myself.