Viewing Thread:
"Do you speak up?"

A topic arose on The Wright Stuff this morning about speaking up to people who make bigot/racist/homophobic remarks. I decided to post this here as it's quite an interesting topic which has affected me in the past.

Say if you was in the pub and you over hear someone making racist remarks, do you speak up and say something? Or do you just keep in quiet?

It's quite a hard dilemma seeing as you'd be concerned on the outcome. I remember Goatboy saying he punched someone in a bar for making some joke/remark about 9/11.

I've heard my Grandma say racist things in the past, but I've never said anything against it because of the fact that my parents have been there, making it very awkward to speak up. My friends have said the same about their elders, I guess it's just the way they were brought up compared to us.

So yeah - Speak up or keep quiet?

English_Bloke wrote:
>
> I don't agree at all.
> The thing is, to me, there is little to no difference between the
> examples you used. Just because someone wears a type of cap, does
> this mean that I should put my hands in my pocket and grasp my keys
> between my knuckles every time I walk past him? How is it any
> different to someone saying, "I don't trust blacks, I was robbed
> by one once"?
>
> Just because he/she can choose to take that hat of if they wish to,
> why should they?
>
> The truth is that you can't always accurately judge people on their
> appearances, but that we all try anyway.

Wearing a cap is a choice, wearing your skin isn't. It's as simple as that.

I'm not condoning either I'm saying that I see someone calling someone 'black scum' as much worse than someone calling somone 'chav scum'. On a scale I find an equal amount of racism worse than an equal amount of minority prejudice.

Hmmm...

I'd go somewhere between the two. So I think you're both wrong :^P


Yeah, it's still judging by appearances, but when you have total control over that aspect of your appearance, then it's reasonable to assume that in some way, it reflects an aspect of your personality.

At some point, if you're going to have an opinion on anyone, you need to base it on something. Ideally someone's true character.

The problem is that anything you use to gauge someone's charater can only ever be an approximation.

Their actions could be warped by circumstances, misinterpreted, or a frail embodiment of very good intentions.
Their words could be misunderstood. They could be lies and half-truths.

Their clothes could be an expression of allegiance to a lifestyle of treating other people like crap. Or they could be completely superficial.


It's kind of scary when you break it down like that. I'm dead against racism, as I expect we all are. But that argument puts it on the scale. Maybe so far down the scale that it's not really reasonable to ever apply it, but it's on the scale nonetheless.

Actually, when you think about cultural differences and let that shape your expectations of peoples' value systems, I guess that's not so far removed from racism. Hopefully less ill-informed, bringing less negative connotations than your average BNP card-holder, but again, on the same scale.


I guess it's all much less cut and dry than we'd like.

I don't think there are any set rules to what is acceptable and what isn't. The extremes of offense are obviously going to be unacceptable, but it gets a bit cloudy towards the middle.

I think context is the main dictator in what is and isn't acceptable, because no two situations will be the same.

Hedfix wrote:
> Well I can see a degree of rational thought behind minority abuse
> (People assuming chavs will steal their car for instance) when
> there's a basis of fact behind such prejudice.
>
> Racism on the other hand is not about 'who chooses to wear what cap
> etc' but to do with something someone is born with that they cannot
> change and THAT from of abuse is far more unacceptable than the same
> level of minority abuse in my opinion.

I don't agree at all.
The thing is, to me, there is little to no difference between the examples you used. Just because someone wears a type of cap, does this mean that I should put my hands in my pocket and grasp my keys between my knuckles every time I walk past him? How is it any different to someone saying, "I don't trust blacks, I was robbed by one once"?

Just because he/she can choose to take that hat of if they wish to, why should they?

The truth is that you can't always accurately judge people on their appearances, but that we all try anyway.

I'd definatly speak up, espcially if it was directed towards one of my friends.

Wasn't it only 50 years ago when "gay" meant jolly?

"You're so gay" as an insult has absolutely nothing to do with sexuality any more though, it's just a general insult. That happens now and then, you know ... yeah, it could be linked back and you could easily say that whoever is using it hates gay people or whatever, but you'd be wrong ... most of the time.

The Romper Stomper soundtrack usually has me in fits of laughter, very racist and very retarded.

I think the genre of music is called OY! or something.

i doubt i'd speak up. there's no point, people that dim aren't going to glean anythign postive from being shown otherwise as they'll probably fail to understand.

when i encounter racism i must admit i chuckle there are still such people in the world. The racism is Scum for example is bordering on parody, but to think some people take it seriously raises a smile.

Cycloon wrote:
>
> More to the point, such throw away comments shouldn't be tolerated
> really.
>
> I.e 'you're so gay' = you're suggesting that by calling someone gay
> you are in fact insulting them.
>
> Before anyone moans about the evil spectre of political correctness,
> yeah, of course there is a line. Just ignorance doesn't give you a
> free pass to cross it everynow and then with some 'joking' remark.

Apart from there's a lot of basis for comedy in such prejudice, even if it is self-mocking/mocking society.

A think I'd rather have a few wrongs than a totally sterile society. :S