The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #134758   Message #3069857
Posted By: Richard Bridge
08-Jan-11 - 11:01 AM
Thread Name: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
Jack Straw and Keith Vaz are it seems no longer on the same hymn sheet. And indeed the use of words in teh matter between them could fairly I think be said to be one of correctness - whether or not "political correctness" as that term is used as a term of abuse.

The evidence should be fairly considered and evaluated - but it is precisely that that the "I'm not racists" here are refusing to do. They do not have statistics or broadly based evidence to indicate that Muslims from the Indian sub-continent ( who are largely , following partition in 1947, Pakistani or Bangladeshi) prey sexually upon "white girls" (whose religion as distinct from colour is not Ithink reported).

This fascination, about the corruption of "our women" has over the years focussed on many ethnic or religious groups. For years it was a worry of the white right about African and Caribbean immigration. Hitler frothed at the mouth about the alleged fact that "spermatic absorption" meant that a German woman who had sex with a Jew was no longer purely Aryan (evidently he did not believe in condoms). Folk song contains "Prince Heathen".

Bearing in mind that Islam is not a "top-down" religion in theory, I have not seen any analysis that shows a concordance of Islamic theocratic views that assert an entitlement for Muslim men to corrupt any women whatever their colour or age. There are nutters, of course, such as the tribal elders who hand out sentences of gang rape (although I have only ever heard of one such incident) but I know of nothing to show a tendency.

I have heard many white males express views that African or Caribbean women are routinely unchaste.

At present there is a lot of racist hot air and no real analysis.



Turning to the "gutter press", while I roundly disagree with Don on many things I think he has the right of this. The key feature that marked out the "gutter press" was the inclination to prefer sensationalism often with an agenda. That is in my view a criticism that can fairly be levelled at the Times and the Telegraph today, and has long been a key characteristic of the Mail and the Sun.