7-year-old branded 'racist' for asking student about skin colour


SLM
+4
#61
What really ticks me off is we have an innocuous question asked by a child certainly young enough to still be innocent of ulterior motives, and it causes such a 'furor' that we're seeing international press on the matter.

But how many stories come out where a blind eye is turned to the repeated, habitual torment of children within our schools? Usually the story comes out after the kid takes his or her life.

We (society in general) have a pretty whacked set of priorities.
 
Machjo
#62
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

And the views of that MP for Hull East are just what I expect from a Labour scumbag.

Quote:

‘However, having spoken to Hayley, I’m satisfied that her seven-year-old son, Elliott, was not being racist in his remarks but just inquisitive,’ he said.

‘It seems the matter has been taken out of all proportion and common sense seems to have gone completely out of the window.’



So what else did you expect from a Labour MP?
 
Blackleaf
+1
#63
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

What really ticks me off is we have an innocuous question asked by a child certainly young enough to still be innocent of ulterior motives, and it causes such a 'furor' that we're seeing international press on the matter.

But how many stories come out where a blind eye is turned to the repeated, habitual torment of children within our schools? Usually the story comes out after the kid takes his or her life.

We (society in general) have a pretty whacked set of priorities.

Most racist attacks in Britain are perpetrated by non-whites against whites. But many people think it's the other way around because the media only report race attacks if the whites are the perpetrators and the blacks are the victims.

In 1999 in the UK, 238,000 white people told researchers they had been victims of a racial offence in a 12-month period, compared to 101,000 Asians and 42,000 blacks.

www.independent.co.uk/news/mo...e-1069502.html (external - login to view)
 
Machjo
#64
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Why is Karl Turned being railed?



His statement is quite reasonable.

But he's a Labour MP, so how can it possibly be reaonsable?
 
JLM
+1
#65
Quote: Originally Posted by SLMView Post

What really ticks me off is we have an innocuous question asked by a child certainly young enough to still be innocent of ulterior motives, and it causes such a 'furor' that we're seeing international press on the matter.

But how many stories come out where a blind eye is turned to the repeated, habitual torment of children within our schools? Usually the story comes out after the kid takes his or her life.

We (society in general) have a pretty whacked set of priorities.

Well said, S.L.M.- you are indeed clever enough to be my sister!
 
Goober
#66
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Why is Karl Turned being railed?



His statement is quite reasonable.

Defending an inane policy implemented by the PC to the extreme is why I think he is a Dufus.
 
Machjo
#67
I remember the case of a Cameroonian lady in a rural part of China who was offered the friendly advice by a local Chinese to wash more often to remove the blackness from her face. My cameroonian friend did not take it offensively in the least owing to the woman's innocence. She'd never met a black person before and had a low education. Intention does matter.

This same cameroonian was infuriated by an American she'd met who was teaching all kinds of prejudices about African Americans to his Chinese friends. Ignorance is one thing, but to not want to inform yourself is a different thing altogether.
 
DaSleeper
+1
#68
Cultural Marxism at it's best.......or worst
 
CDNBear
+1
#69
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Defending an inane policy implemented by the PC to the extreme is why I think he is a Dufus.

He didn't defended the policy in the article. He pointed out it's flaw, and the fact that the school and city council, were mandated to act.

He then pointed out that commonsense has flown out the window, in how the statute is being wielded.
 
Machjo
#70
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeperView Post

Cultural Marxism at it's best.......or worst

What does this have to do with Marxism?

Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

He didn't defended the policy in the article. He pointed out it's flaw, and the fact that the school and city council, were mandated to act.

He then pointed out that commonsense has flown out the window, in how the statute is being wielded.

B..b...but he's a Labour MP.
 
DaSleeper
#71
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

What does this have to do with Marxism?

What is trying to get everyone to conform to to a set pattern of action, speech and even thought???
cultural marxism

It has taken over Europe and is coming here....hell...it's already here....
 
Goober
#72
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

He didn't defended the policy in the article. He pointed out it's flaw, and the fact that the school and city council, were mandated to act.

He then pointed out that commonsense has flown out the window, in how the statute is being wielded.

And what does he plan to do about it???? Nothing would be a good guess.

Last year, it was revealed that teachers are branding thousands of children racist or homophobic following playground squabbles.

More than 20,000 pupils aged 11 or younger were put on record for so-called hate crimes such as using the word ‘gaylord’.


Read more: Boy, 7, branded a racist for asking schoolmate: 'Are you brown because you come from Africa?' | Mail Online
 
CDNBear
#73
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

B..b...but he's a Labour MP.

Ya so?

Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

And what does he plan to do about it???? Nothing would be a good guess.

That's an interesting guess.

Quote:

Last year, it was revealed that teachers are branding thousands of children racist or homophobic following playground squabbles.

More than 20,000 pupils aged 11 or younger were put on record for so-called hate crimes such as using the word ‘gaylord’.


Read more: Boy, 7, branded a racist for asking schoolmate: 'Are you brown because you come from Africa?' | Mail Online

Ya, I already quoted that.
 
TenPenny
+1
#74
There cannot be any 'common sense' when everyone has adopted 'zero tolerance' policies.

Zero tolerance means that there is no room for thinking.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
#75
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

There cannot be any 'common sense' when everyone has adopted 'zero tolerance' policies.

Zero tolerance means that there is no room for thinking.

We wouldn't want to have thinking. Its a school after all.
 
Goober
#76
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Ya so?

That's an interesting guess.

Ya, I already quoted that.

20,000 on file for the use of one word. Wonder what the total number is as they only used stats from 1 word???
 
CDNBear
#77
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

There cannot be any 'common sense' when everyone has adopted 'zero tolerance' policies.

Zero tolerance means that there is no room for thinking.

I disagree.

Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

20,000 on file for the use of one word. Wonder what the total number is as they only used stats from 1 word???

Gaylord was an example.
 
SLM
+1
#78
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

Most racist attacks in Britain are perpetrated by non-whites against whites. But many people think it's the other way around because the media only report race attacks if the whites are the perpetrators and the blacks are the victims.

In 1999 in the UK, 238,000 white people told researchers they had been victims of a racial offence in a 12-month period, compared to 101,000 Asians and 42,000 blacks.

Most race attack victims `are white' - News - The Independent (external - login to view)

Any judgement or attack on someone for something as superficial as skin colour or ethnic background is, well, superficial. Irrespective of whom the victim is.

I think it's sad that a concept that started out as a means to establish a norm for how we talk to and treat people who are different has been so perverted as to become the complete opposite. People use it as weapon. To say it's morally or ethically wrong to characterize someone or label someone based on race, religion, sexual orientation etc is not a bad thing. We should be encouraging everyone to use such sound judgement in how they view the world. It's just too bad that the concept has been hijacked and is being defined by those who misuse it.
 
Goober
#79
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

I disagree.

Gaylord was an example.

This policy is just one of many that far right wing groups latch onto. These policies when managed as in this case also cause more division between ethnic groups. Just more fuel for the fire.

The UK has many such policies that many have taken to the extreme. The Nanny State gone wild.
 
CDNBear
#80
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Thi policy is just one of many that far right wign groups latch onto. These policies when managed as in this case also cause more division between ethnic groups. Just more fuel for the fire.

The UK has many such policies that many have taken to the extreme. The Nanny State gone wild.

I don't disagree.

But zero tolerance policy, wasn't envisioned to bully 7 year olds, over innocent innocuous questions.

That's an abuse of a flaw in the policy. That allows multi interpretation.
 
Ron in Regina
+2
#81
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Thi policy is just one of many that far right wing groups latch onto. These policies when managed as in this case also cause more division between ethnic groups. Just more fuel for the fire.

The UK has many such policies that many have taken to the extreme. The Nanny State gone wild.


Far Right...Far Left...I think the key word is "Far" as in "Fringe"......
 
Goober
+1
#82
Quote: Originally Posted by Ron in ReginaView Post

Far Right...Far Left...I think the key word is "Far" as in "Fringe"......

Ron - These policies have become more common in the UK. PC types enacting rules and regs that can and do cause more problems, as in this case then the solve.
 
SLM
+4
#83
Quote: Originally Posted by Ron in ReginaView Post

Far Right...Far Left...I think the key word is "Far" as in "Fringe"......

Well that's their job though, to sit around and pontificate and be "the correct way of looking at things".

Meanwhile the rest of us just go to work, spend time with our friends and families, generally get along fairly well with one another and keep society chugging along.

That is until someone stops us to tell us how we have it all wrong.
 
TenPenny
+1
#84
Bear, what part of 'zero tolerance' do you believe allows for thinking?

'Zero tolerance' means the rules must be applied literally and strictly, with no room for mitigating circumstances or interpretation.
 
JLM
#85
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

Bear, what part of 'zero tolerance' do you believe allows for thinking?

'Zero tolerance' means the rules must be applied literally and strictly, with no room for mitigating circumstances or interpretation.

"There's an exception to every rule"
 
CDNBear
+3
#86
Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

Bear, what part of 'zero tolerance' do you believe allows for thinking?

We go back to effort.

Do you really believe what this boy asked was racist?

Of course you don't. You apply effort and a reasoned judgment.

Quote:

'Zero tolerance' means the rules must be applied literally and strictly, with no room for mitigating circumstances or interpretation.

Are there ever mitigating circumstances for racism?

The very fact that someone, anyone, found that his question was racist, examples how the policies flaw is susceptible to interpretation. Because it is in the very interpretation, of what is racism, that we have a 7 year old, being accused of racism, because he asked an innocent innocuous question.
 
Machjo
#87
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeperView Post

What is trying to get everyone to conform to to a set pattern of action, speech and even thought???
cultural marxism

It has taken over Europe and is coming here....hell...it's already here....

I thought Marxism had to do with the common ownership of material property; are you sure you don't mean cultural totalitarianism?
 
dumpthemonarchy
#88
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackleafView Post

Most racist attacks in Britain are perpetrated by non-whites against whites. But many people think it's the other way around because the media only report race attacks if the whites are the perpetrators and the blacks are the victims.

In 1999 in the UK, 238,000 white people told researchers they had been victims of a racial offence in a 12-month period, compared to 101,000 Asians and 42,000 blacks.

Most race attack victims `are white' - News - The Independent (external - login to view)

Yeah, stuff lke that isn't in the PC playbook, so it gets ignored. You can't have black colonial guilt, or Asian colonial guilt, that's just not possible. Blaming all whites all the time is the aim. Good, upright fascists hate facts when they're trying to fix the world. Immigrant communities tend to prey on each other in Canada, not white Canadians. The Tamils lived with a lot of that from the Tigers.
 
TenPenny
#89
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

We go back to effort.

Do you really believe what this boy asked was racist?

Of course you don't. You apply effort and a reasoned judgment.

Are there ever mitigating circumstances for racism?

The very fact that someone, anyone, found that his question was racist, examples how the policies flaw is susceptible to interpretation. Because it is in the very interpretation, of what is racism, that we have a 7 year old, being accused of racism, because he asked an innocent innocuous question.


But in a zero tolerance situation, none of that matters. He is guilty of racism and bullying because, in a zero tolerance world, there is only a yes or no, and since the 'victim' believes it was racism, therefore it is. There is no tolerance, there is no room to question.
He asked a question about skin color, therefore he is a racist. End of story.
 
CDNBear
+1
#90
Quote: Originally Posted by dumpthemonarchyView Post

Good, upright fascists hate facts when they're trying to fix the world.

So that's why you ignore the facts about First Nations all the time.

Quote: Originally Posted by TenPennyView Post

But in a zero tolerance situation, none of that matters. He is guilty of racism and bullying because, in a zero tolerance world, there is only a yes or no, and since the 'victim' believes it was racism, therefore it is. There is no tolerance, there is no room to question.
He asked a question about skin color, therefore he is a racist. End of story.

That's an opinion, not supported by the facts.

All one has to do, is look at the dismal affects of zero tolerance of bullying in the Safe Schools Act.

Scenarios such as the testimony of a group of bullies, being held with higher regard than that of the single word of the bullied.

Again, it comes down to effort, application, reason and interpretation. The flaws are many.

BTW, the alleged victim in this case, didn't make a complaint. His mother did.
 
no new posts