Everyone needs to give this shit a read.
A Whiter Australia?
And you have to read the comments too. Whichever way you perceive it, you will still be disgusted. Disgusted that the author was offended or disgusted that some people think the author had no right to be offended.
If you don't read it, in a nutshell, the blog post is about the Asian author waiting on a table at a restaurant. Upon serving dishes to a lady and two boys, one of the boys loudly said “KONICHIWA!!!”. The lady then said to the kid “Charlie, that’s rude!” good on her. The author still made a point to the lady to sort the kids out as racism starts from home.
Numerous comments are posted along with the blog post, about half of which take the stance that the child (said to be under 10) has done no wrong and was merely trying to be friendly, and the remaining half appalled that the child was even cheeky enough to dare mock a grown adult.
Now you will
a) think the author had no right to be cross and you pity the poor child for having done nothing wrong yet being reprimanded
b) be decently annoyed that the incident occurred in the first place
And upon reading the comments you will
a) get even more angry that anyone could possibly think the child has done any wrong
b) be absolutely disgusted that people think the child has done no wrong
I take the same firm view as the author. That it is intolerable to categorise people and hence greet them according to how you categorise them. Now I am paraphrasing from some of the comments that relate to the blog post. The issue is not that Charlie said “KONICHIWA!!!” to a non-Japanese but otherwise Asian appearing person. The issue is that he decided to greet this person of Asian appearance, a different way than he would have greeted someone else of say, Caucasian or Indian appearance.
It would be considered racial verbal abuse or racial taunting to walk up to an Irishman and speak to him in an Irish accent on purpose just for the bloody fact that he's Irish. The same way it would be to mock an Indian accent or a British accent when encountering an Indian or a Brit. I'm not particularly sure any Canadian appreciates constantly being taunted for having a Canadian accent either. So while a lot of people are upset that Victoria is being labelled racist against people who are obviously not of Caucasian descent, that isn't true, because even people who ARE of Caucasian descent, are the butts of jokes too. Have you seen the rage in someone of Southern European descent when they are called a "wog"? How someone looks or sounds should NOT be the bar in which anyone sets their treatment towards them.
Would the people who think the child did no wrong, say the same if the child had greeted a handicapped person with slow exaggeratedly emphasised words? I'd like to think not.
Just because one appears a certain way does not mean they afford different treatment. That my friend is discrimination. And thank fudge we have laws against discrimination in Victoria albeit not very well regulated (I should know I studied discrimination laws).
Oh don't get me started now on the different types of discrimination.
Someone I know got egged. A Thai girl and her mother had eggs THROWN at them by none other than a bunch of Caucasian children. The obvious fact here is that these children don't know any better and think they are superior to their victims. Such behaviour is unacceptable for ANYONE to commit, let alone from the so called "superior" breed these children think they are. How can people who think they are better than others, stoop so low? I would be as disgusted if it were Asian children who threw eggs at other Asian children. How anyone can think to even do such a thing horrifies me! (I am as appalled by the behaviour of these youngsters as I am with the man going around splashing acid on women's faces in Malaysia. What on earth possesses these people to think they can go around throwing things at other people???)
Charlie from earlier, could very well grow up to commit this egging crime.
And yes it IS a crime. A criminal offence called battery. Application of force was direct, injuries not required (that would be worse even), had intention for the eggs they were hurling to hit their victims, they had the foresight of the possibility that at least one of the eggs they threw would make contact, anddddd being negligent in throwing the eggs in bullshit. And if you add in the racial factor foooh heaps more there.
One day I will use the letter of the law against people who give me trouble. Now if only I had a device of software that identifies faces straight off a camera. Wouldn't it be lovely to have the name and address of your batterer or assaulter?
Now if you've got your undergarments in a knot filled with rage after reading what I have to say, take a deep breath, count to 10 and bear in mind I have been the target of numerous incidents, albeit non life threatening, traumatising. So I DO know what I'm talking about and I come from a standpoint as neutral to all races, nationalities and ethnicities as is politically correct. And lets face it, politically correct is about as neutral to all races, nationalities and ethnicities as anyone can get.
A Whiter Australia?
And you have to read the comments too. Whichever way you perceive it, you will still be disgusted. Disgusted that the author was offended or disgusted that some people think the author had no right to be offended.
If you don't read it, in a nutshell, the blog post is about the Asian author waiting on a table at a restaurant. Upon serving dishes to a lady and two boys, one of the boys loudly said “KONICHIWA!!!”. The lady then said to the kid “Charlie, that’s rude!” good on her. The author still made a point to the lady to sort the kids out as racism starts from home.
Numerous comments are posted along with the blog post, about half of which take the stance that the child (said to be under 10) has done no wrong and was merely trying to be friendly, and the remaining half appalled that the child was even cheeky enough to dare mock a grown adult.
Now you will
a) think the author had no right to be cross and you pity the poor child for having done nothing wrong yet being reprimanded
b) be decently annoyed that the incident occurred in the first place
And upon reading the comments you will
a) get even more angry that anyone could possibly think the child has done any wrong
b) be absolutely disgusted that people think the child has done no wrong
I take the same firm view as the author. That it is intolerable to categorise people and hence greet them according to how you categorise them. Now I am paraphrasing from some of the comments that relate to the blog post. The issue is not that Charlie said “KONICHIWA!!!” to a non-Japanese but otherwise Asian appearing person. The issue is that he decided to greet this person of Asian appearance, a different way than he would have greeted someone else of say, Caucasian or Indian appearance.
It would be considered racial verbal abuse or racial taunting to walk up to an Irishman and speak to him in an Irish accent on purpose just for the bloody fact that he's Irish. The same way it would be to mock an Indian accent or a British accent when encountering an Indian or a Brit. I'm not particularly sure any Canadian appreciates constantly being taunted for having a Canadian accent either. So while a lot of people are upset that Victoria is being labelled racist against people who are obviously not of Caucasian descent, that isn't true, because even people who ARE of Caucasian descent, are the butts of jokes too. Have you seen the rage in someone of Southern European descent when they are called a "wog"? How someone looks or sounds should NOT be the bar in which anyone sets their treatment towards them.
Would the people who think the child did no wrong, say the same if the child had greeted a handicapped person with slow exaggeratedly emphasised words? I'd like to think not.
Just because one appears a certain way does not mean they afford different treatment. That my friend is discrimination. And thank fudge we have laws against discrimination in Victoria albeit not very well regulated (I should know I studied discrimination laws).
Oh don't get me started now on the different types of discrimination.
Someone I know got egged. A Thai girl and her mother had eggs THROWN at them by none other than a bunch of Caucasian children. The obvious fact here is that these children don't know any better and think they are superior to their victims. Such behaviour is unacceptable for ANYONE to commit, let alone from the so called "superior" breed these children think they are. How can people who think they are better than others, stoop so low? I would be as disgusted if it were Asian children who threw eggs at other Asian children. How anyone can think to even do such a thing horrifies me! (I am as appalled by the behaviour of these youngsters as I am with the man going around splashing acid on women's faces in Malaysia. What on earth possesses these people to think they can go around throwing things at other people???)
Charlie from earlier, could very well grow up to commit this egging crime.
And yes it IS a crime. A criminal offence called battery. Application of force was direct, injuries not required (that would be worse even), had intention for the eggs they were hurling to hit their victims, they had the foresight of the possibility that at least one of the eggs they threw would make contact, anddddd being negligent in throwing the eggs in bullshit. And if you add in the racial factor foooh heaps more there.
One day I will use the letter of the law against people who give me trouble. Now if only I had a device of software that identifies faces straight off a camera. Wouldn't it be lovely to have the name and address of your batterer or assaulter?
Now if you've got your undergarments in a knot filled with rage after reading what I have to say, take a deep breath, count to 10 and bear in mind I have been the target of numerous incidents, albeit non life threatening, traumatising. So I DO know what I'm talking about and I come from a standpoint as neutral to all races, nationalities and ethnicities as is politically correct. And lets face it, politically correct is about as neutral to all races, nationalities and ethnicities as anyone can get.
2 comments:
I read the article, and its hard to decide without being there at the time. If there was intent to mock. i.e. 'konichiwa!', then the two children laugh histerically, then it was clearly not acceptable.
But if the child was sincerely saying 'konichiwa' and believing (mistakenly) that the waiter was Japanese, then I don't see the problem. He might have been learning some elementary Japanese at school and not learned much about other asian nationalies. Maybe he just wanted to try out his language abilities, and didnt know that it might be polite to first find out whether the other person was indeed Japanese.
Political correctness has gone too far these days.
For example: Lets say i go to a Chinese restaurant in Chinatown, Melbourne & all the waiters/waitresses are of Asian appearance.
I try to use my limited Mandarin to order, only to find that the other party speaks Cantonese or is not even Chinese at all, so I immediately apologise for the mistake. But I really don't think it is an offensive or racist mistake. I just wanted to get into the spirit of the restaurant, and experience some Chinese culture.
The waiter should not be offended, and if he or she is then it is an over-reaction on their part, becaue it was a contextual thing.
The commenters on the article are doing so without a deep enough contextual knowledge of what happenned.
In my mind, everything comes down to intent. If the person indended to mock the other party, then something was done wrong. If there was no intent, then the waiter over-reacted. If there is doubt as to the intent, then maybe they need to discuss things.
Indeed you are entitled to your views of the issue and you do make good points, however the overall issue I was addressing in the original post was that children should be taught from a young age, not to discriminate. Discriminate taken literally to mean differentiating and as a result of that differentiation, treat differently or favour.
Regardless if the boy had good intentions, the assumption itself was out of place and in such a case - albeit good intentions - he still needs to be taught that it is rude to assume certain things about people based on their appearance. He may for all we know, be a very bright young boy learning a new language as you pointed out, but it was nonetheless improper of him to assume.
Whether the child had intent is relevant only in this situation. If not reprimanded, he will think it is ok to repeat his behaviour time and time again. He may have no cruel intentions when the incident occurred, but when he grows up and if he does ever intend to be racially abusive, he will recall the time when he was a child and nobody reprimanded him. He will just grow up thinking its ok, with or without intent of racial abuse. He will not think it to be wrong and is unlikely to stand up against it for it will be formed in his mind that it is ok to do such things.
I hope I have made a fair point. This is merely my view and as individuals, we sometimes find different reasons to explain the occurrence of a problem ie. the numerous theories on why global warming is occurring.
Post a Comment