BS: Political Correctness goes too far

Subject: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: EBarnacle
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 02:40 PM

Now they're going too far! They are removing the N-word from Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer. These books are among the most banned books in America because people are afraid to talk frankly about what was done when.

Here's the story:

New Edition of "Huckleberry Finn" to Be Released Without the "N-Word"
Mark Twain scholar Alan Gribben is making waves this week for announcing that he will publish a new, single-volume edition of Twain's classic (and controversial) novels "Huckleberry Finn" and "Adventures of Tom Sawyer" in which every instance of the "n-word" is replaced with the word "slave."

Gribben has nothing but good intentions in removing the racial epithet, which appears 219 times, from Twain's work. As he said in an interview with Publishers Weekly:



"This is not an effort to render Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn colorblind," said Gribben, speaking from his office at Auburn University at Montgomery, where he's spent most of the past 20 years heading the English department. "Race matters in these books. It's a matter of how you express that in the 21st century."

...."I was sought out by local teachers, and to a person they said we would love to teach [Tom Sawyer], and Huckleberry Finn, but we feel we can't do it anymore. In the new classroom, it's really not acceptable."



Indeed, most teachers can't teach the book to students these days, as it's one of the country's most frequently banned books (HT Raw Story). And the new edition could placate the desire of school districts to avoid racially-charged controversy, theoretically making the book available to more young people. (Although I have a hard time believe that removing the word will automatically erase all controversy surrounding the book. Won't teachers have to address the word-swap with students? It seems hard to ignore.)

Meanwhile, some people have argued that removing the "n-word" from Huck Finn is no different -- or worse -- than removing f-bombs from movies for general consumption on network TV.

But understandably, many people are up in arms about the move, arguing that Gribben's edition, to be published by NewSouth Books, will whitewash the nation's history and ruin a literary classic by changing the meaning of many passages.

Speaking to Publishers Weekly, Twain scholar Thomas Wortham drew a connection between Gribben and Thomas Bowdler, who "published expurgated versions of Shakespeare for family reading." "A book like Professor Gribben has imagined doesn't challenge children [and their teachers] to ask, 'Why would a child like Huck use such reprehensible language?'," said Wortham.

This Week in Blackness editor-in-chief Elon James White goes one step further in Salon:



The book, which deals directly with racism, is not better served by erasing the racial slur. The only purpose is to ease the tension that is felt by parents and teachers of students who would read it. To pretend this is for some higher good is to insult the intelligence of the American public. America is a society in which our ugly history is not so far gone as to allow for cold, detached analysis. Because of the mistreatment of everyone who wasn't/isn't white, straight and male, America is constantly defending itself instead of dealing head-on with the wrongs that it willingly played a role in....

America talks about race like scared parents talk with their kids about sex. We're vague, sometimes terribly misleading and on occasion leave out huge aspects of the situation that would allow kids to make better decisions about how they conduct themselves. If we continue with our horrendously skewed and willfully ignorant interpretations of history, we will find ourselves with a generation that's woefully misinformed and it will be completely our fault.



By Lauren Kelley | Sourced from AlterNet

Posted at January 5, 2011, 8:56

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: goatfell
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 02:56 PM

yes it has gone to far

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: gnu
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 02:56 PM

Bloody shameful hiding the truth from future generations. That horrible truth should be chiseled in stone so NOBODY forgets the way it, hopefully one day, WAS.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:13 PM

Lauren Kelly is absolutely right. Parents and teachers are NOT protecting kids by censoring or changing literary documents from a previous age...they are protecting themselves from the discomfort and fear they are consumed with regarding contemporary issues of race, gender, religion, etc. They are attempting to make their children as insecure and confused as themselves. They are shoring up their own serious emotional dysfunctions and practicing avoidance of uncomfortable realities. That does not protect children in any way whatsoever...and it promotes the growth of ignorance.

It is nothing but the culture of fear, masquerading as a idealistic battle for human rights.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,999
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:15 PM

True enough, LH. However, school teachers work for school boards, and school boards are made up of parents. That teachers are responsible for this shit is just that: it`s shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:29 PM

Righto. I get your point, 999.

Why is it that the most insecure and fucked-up people in the entire society are the ones who get to push the agenda? ;-) Ever wondered about that? I suspect it is because they are the loudest.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:36 PM

I am assuming that most of us are what is called 'white'. How do people of color feel about the prospect of sanitizing the books?

I would hope that the majority of them would also regard Huck and Tom as classical icons- but I don't actually know.

I miss Azizi. Not only would she have an opinion, she would have insight.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:39 PM

NPR Talk of the Nation is just getting ready to talk about this.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:40 PM

Have black people actually been asked whether they'd prefer the word to be changed in texts from a previous era? Presumably it's a misguided attempt to spare their feelings that this is felt to be necessary. If they would rather it stayed as written by Mark Twain, why should anyone take it upon themselves to Bowdlerise the books? It was the same here with Enid Blyton's children's books. All Golliwogs were eradicated from her stories, even though they're only toys. Many black people said they'd rather keep the Gollies, but the Politically Correct Brigade hung in there. I think young students are perfectly capable of taking the texts as written, and indeed it's an insult to them to try to screen them from any racism. One should NOT change any text from the past, it's vandalism of literature.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:48 PM

. "How do people of color feel about the prospect of sanitizing the books?"

"Have black people actually been asked whether they'd prefer the word to be changed in texts from a previous era?"

I heard two say last night that they felt (paraphrasing) that this move was misguided and that sanitizing the books would just complicate the ability to discuss what those words were about.

One was Prof. Melissa Harris-Perry of Princeton University...and my mind blanks out on the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:52 PM

Ficdep @ Ministry of Truth at work. Truly Orwellian.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:54 PM

This is not "political correctness" [which, by the way, is another right-wing BuShite Republican bumper-sticker buzz-word and thus essentially meaningless].

Its just simple stupidity.

As was/is 'banning' the book in the first instance. Plain stupidity.

However, stupidity has become enshrined as a virtue in the U S of A (Greatest Country In The World!!)- so best get used to it.

Plenty more stupidity where this came from.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Acorn4
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:55 PM

I think Kipling's "Just So" stories have similar references.

An interesting example of this is the evolution of the opening chorus of the musical "Showboat".

This is a chorus of black workers singing:- "N*****s all work on the Mississippi." Apparently the N word was used by the black workers in a sort of tongue in cheek reference to themselves, and Oscar Hammerstein's lyrics were intendedin a satirical vein, much of the musical being laden with social comment.

The lines were changed to:- "Darkies work on the Mississippi" then "Coloured Folks work on the Mississippi" then "We all work on the Mississippi", and finally no-one worked on the Mississippi as the opening chorus was left out.

It does however, put a teacher in a difficult position, particularly with a junior class, when such "loaded by context" words appear in a class reader. I think I would just tend to avoid the text.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:57 PM

Actually, Ebbie, I think of myself as "human", not White. It's a good basis to go on.

The only country I've ever been in in my life where I had the very distinct feeling that there was simply no conscious level of prejudice in anyone there Black people and White people and other racial groups was...Cuba. People's perceptions of one another there did not appear to hinge on race at all.

It was one of the things that really stood out down there, and I have to assume it was a direct results of social ideas brought in and promoted by Castro's revolution.

If anyone here is sceptical about what I say about the lack of racial divisions in Cuba, I can only make one suggestion. Go down there and see for yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 03:58 PM

Sometimes classic books are simplified for smaller kids.

I could see the value of it in that context.

In fact, in that context its been going on for years anyway so this isn't really news.

The first time I was introduced to these books was when I was 5, and I read simplified versions that didn't contain the word 'nigger'.

That way my Mum got to read me the stories and enjoy them without having to give a 5 year old a pretty complex sociology lecture simultaneously.

I read the real things later when I was more mature.

we have 18 certs for violence and sex, and for films containing sexual swear words and racist language.

Its probably important to learn a bit about who, why and what audience before we get too hot under the collar.

So old news, and not that big a deal.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 04:06 PM

There's no point in having a five-year-old (or"smaller kids") read Huckleberry Finn-really rather silly. No way he/she could understand what its about or begin to appreciate it. Stick with Dick and Jane, the Hardy Boys, etc.

When they're old enough to understand the work, the "N-word"- properly explained & placed in historical & literary context- won't be problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 04:14 PM

No...but, just think, Greg...I bet some ordinary words that we are innocently using right now will become politically incorrect in some future political era...and the same old shit will start again, only we won't be there to witness it! ;-D

For instance, it might someday be illegal to publicly display the American flag in various places, just as it is now with the Swastika! I could see that happening, given a certain chain of dramatic historical events...with new losers and winners.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 04:16 PM

I am kinda 50/50 on this one. The correct question to ask is where does it come from.

If the source of the inertia is from a group of people who feel seriously offended by a word, regardless of it's use in time, well that's one thing, and needs careful consideration. In that case, I would lean towards the side of those seriously offended. I am sympathetic to those who seriously are offended by certain words, and on the impact on their children. I understand that the "n" word is used within the black community, but, that is likely different, or possibly equally hurtful to some.

On the other hand, if the source of the action is from the politically correct do gooder crowd (aka "tight assed university folks"), I would lean on the side of "butt out, and just let it be".

IMO, more open discussion would be needed in either case.

I am familiar with a movement a few years back, in Canada, to call fishermen "fishers". It was promoted by the AKA movement (noted above). Both male and female folks who fish were insulted...because no one asked them what they should be called. One female friend who fishes told me, " My father was a fisherman. my mother was a fisherman, and I am proud to call myself a fisherman. A fisher is a small weasel like animal, and that ain't me". Fortunately, the term fisher has mostly fades away, except on University campuses.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 04:20 PM

Lox, that's pretty much what the editor said about his new version. It's meant for younger kids for teachers who are being harassed about it by parents. If I remember correctly, he said he discusses that very thing in the preface/intro. The audio will be available HERE after 6pm.

For the record, I would not want my biracial grandsons to have had to read it when they were younger. And, they live in an area of CT where it is very mixed and supportive. I'll have to ask my dau. if they've read either book.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 04:21 PM

It is important to understand that Huck Finn would have not KNOWN other words to use. Sam Clemens understood that....and he 'allowed' Huck to call Jim 'nigger' and still respect him and call him a friend.
The point was made in the discussion I saw that, if 'slave' is substituted, the entire point is missed. There are/were many 'slaves' in the world who were NOT African, and Jim's status of being a slave was not the point of how he was identified in that age.
   Gradually, over the years, words have changed...to 'nigra' and 'Negro' and 'Black' and 'African-American'(which in itself fails to include many 'darker' people.) I sat in NAACP meetings in the mid to late 60s and watched as various Black/African-American members argued among themselves over what they wished to be called! Many simply wished to be called 'Sir' occasionally.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 04:35 PM

"It is important to understand that Huck Finn would have not KNOWN other words to use."

Right. That is the real point, and that's why the books should not be changed...if people actually wish to learn about the past. If, on the other hand, they merely wish to hide in a certain political comfort zone they've recently made up, that's another matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 04:44 PM

The blackest people I have ever seen were on the beaches and promenades of resorts around Marbella in Spain - they were flogging cheap watches and other junk, and were very friendly guys indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 05:18 PM

My husband, an Ivorian, is VERY black. In fact, in the dark streets of our village (no street lamps here) he disappears altogether unless he grins. I've just asked him what he thinks about changing books to remove racist words. He was puzzled, as he doesn't think a printed word can hurt him. Also, he says "The man wrote these words, so why change them today?" This is I think a semantic and linguistic question about the implication and meaning of words changing over time. What was not offensive then may have become so now. But that is not in itself a reason to interfere with text. But if in the street a racist yells the 'n' word at a black person, that is a deliberate attempt to insult and offend. The difference lies in the attitude and intention of the user. Surely people (even young students) are perfectly capable of understanding this?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 05:23 PM

As usual, it is not the tool (the knife or the hammer or the word) which is in itself good or evil. It is the intentions of the person using the tool, and the context in which that tool is used that determine the choice between good and evil....or just plain neutral.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: gnu
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 05:24 PM

Let me clarify my post above... whether or not the use of any word is or was racist (or otherwise) in context it should be allowed to stand. Fact is, erasing that word erases the responsibilty of the author from the use of that word. This should never be allowed. It is a distortion of history and FACT.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 05:27 PM

Good point. For the same reason the Nazi Swastika symbol should not be excised from historical accounts, historical artifacts, photos, or models and art of historical ships, aircraft, and other equipment of that time. To do so is a deliberate distortion of history and FACT.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 05:36 PM

"It is the intentions of the person using the tool, and the context in which that tool is used that determine the choice between good and evil....or just plain neutral".

Kinda sounds like gunbs don't kill, people do, LH?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 05:52 PM

"There's no point in having a five-year-old (or"smaller kids") read Huckleberry Finn-really rather silly"

Well - except that I got an idea of the story at a young age and was entertained by it, and then later when I was older was drawn to it because it rang bells.

There's 3 points.


"That is the real point,"

There are lots of points.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 05:55 PM

Yes, Ed, people kill. A gun that is locked safely away kills no one. A gun that is used responsibly on a firing range kills no one. A gun that is used sensibly and responsibly to hunt ducks will kill some ducks, but it won't kill people if the gun owner handles it properly. A gun in the hands of a responsible person who handles it sensibly and without harmful intent kills no one.

That does not, however, equate to a blanket statement from me that I want everyone to have a gun! ;-) I don't. Not everyone is responsible or trustworthy with a gun, are they?

But the essential problem in life is not guns, hammers, knives, or specific words...the essential problem in life is people who use any of those things to do harm to someone. The main reason people worry so much more about guns, as opposed to hammers, is that they kill much more efficiently than a hammer, they were originally designed to kill, and they can kill at a considerable distance!

The same is true of explosives, military bombs, flamethrowers, poison gas, and atomic bombs...and that's why you can't just go and buy any of them at the local corner store. It's a matter of common sense to figure these things out, not a political principle.

It's also a matter of common sense to see that the use of the word "nigger" in the context of a Mark Twain book is not, and was never a racial attack on Black people. It was simply an honest depiction of the time and culture that Twain was writing about.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 06:32 PM

I my battles here against the conventional view of homosexuality and how we disregard uncomfortable facts to suit our agenda, I have been attacked many times, called many nasty names, had my sexuality called into question to bolster the stance of my opponents.

These people are "liberals" all, but they do not see their abuse for what it is, an attack on real liberalism. As Little Hawk has so eloquently stated, they feel a need to supress anything which contradicts or calls into question their beliefs.
Freedom of speech and thought, within reasonable limits should always be upheld in a genuinly liberal society.

Regarding the issue in hand, censorship of this and other literature is a crime against freedom and culture and should not be tolerated.

Ebbie wonders what Azizi's view would have been, well I was never a supporter of Azizi or her viewpoint regarding race, I felt that she was covertly punishing us for the sins of our fathers......taking too much satisfaction in the suffering of her people.
That in itself is a type of racism.
Racists come in all colours, in the UK there is a huge scandal about to explode regarding the sexual exploitation of very young girls by mainly Pakistani adult males.
According to the report in todays Times, these Pakistani Muslims do not recognise these young white girls as being morally clean or of as much value as Muslim girls.

A spokesman says,"This is a form of racism that is abhorrent and totally unacceptable in a society which prides itself on equality and justice"
We must realise that minorities can be as guilty of criminality as the majority.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 06:50 PM

"I felt that she was covertly punishing us for the sins of our fathers"

Provide an example.



If necessary, I can provide examples of you attacking Azizi in threads about race to which she hadn't even posted (key words "thatcher" and " gollywog").



And now that she is off the forum you are at it again.



You play a "nice" game for a while, and then you start spouting bilious, spineless crap again at the first opportunity.


Abuse?



You aren't worthy of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 07:03 PM

An interesting perspective LH.

But, as with most issues, there are many factors and complexities that do not put everything in black and white terms, (or, simple logos), no pun intended.

As to historic accuracy, this is a story, not a history book, right? Let's put it in perspective.

It reminds me of a similar local incident.

A few years ago, a local issue arose as some people agressively protested that a black teenager was allowed a summer job as a uniformed officer in a local historic colonial (French) fort. The boy was hired as summer help, with other youngsters. They would march about in front of tourists a few times a day in a reinacment of military perations of the day.

Some people protested that it was not "historically accurate", as no black people served in the locally posted French military during this colonial period.

After a few weeks of tense battles in the newspaper, people settled down and realized that it was not the end of the world from a historical perspective, and the lad was allowed to keep his job. I suspect the the historic records were not impacted, and the teen got to make a few dollars to support his education.

My lesson was one has to put issues like this in perspective, and consider all the issues, before taking sides and firing off the guns.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 07:34 PM

I in no way can I speak for black people but...

...I'd guess that you'd find that black folks who are aware of Mark Twain would find it objectionable to change his language...

What I do find objectionable, however, is that white people really are no closer to having a discussion about race now then they were 14 years ago when Bill Clinton suggested that it was time...

So, to white people everywhere... When will it be time???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 07:52 PM

Yes Bobert well said, and I'm in complete agreement with your point.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 08:09 PM

I am white and prepared, bring it on.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Genie
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 08:25 PM

From the perspective of the author of a work - albeit perhaps deceased - I don't think it should matter whether any group of individuals is offended by the content of that work.
Don't bowdlerize, sanitize, or adulterate an author's work and then attribute that mangled document to that person.    If a book is considered too offensive, even when studied under the tutelage of the school teacher or professor or parent, DON'T USE IT. (Libraries should still have the unabridged book for those who want to study it on their own.)

Yes, there can be value in reading the Reader's Digest Condensed versions of some books or simplifying and shortening some books for use with young children, but it needs to be made abundantly clear to the students, their parents, and any other readers that these are NOT the authentic works of such-and-such authors.    Words like "abridged" need to be prominently displayed.

I'm wondering what the point is of using Huckleberry Finn or Tom Sawyer as classroom reading for kids and teens, though, if it's not used partially as a stimulus to discussion of the times and societal conditions reflected in those books. (BTW, are they changing Injun Joe to "Native-American Joe" or "First-Nations Joe" in Tom Sawyer?)

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 09:14 PM

What you're all missing is that schools are not teaching this book at all because of the n-word. No kids are reading it. None. Zilch. Is that a bad thing? Could be. But it's REALITY. Get over it.

By excising that word, the book can get back into schools and kids can start reading it again.

I think they should state plainly up front that the book used to be racier and has been toned down, but not say how. That will send the kids (the ones who give a crap) racing to the library to read the original! Everybody wins.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 09:14 PM

I agree that books with offensive words should be not be used in schools.

My recollection is some racially offensive words (for example, Jap, and Indian-giver, squaw) have been changed, in some school texts, in some countries that were clearly racially offensive. Could the issue that this case refers to a clearly offensive black term? Could it be a USA thing?

If the offensive words were bad swear words, pro Nazi, anti-semite, anti Christian, or anti women would they be allowed in schools?

Just wondering?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Deckman
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 09:23 PM

The word "NIGGER" was used for several hundred years. It was used for a purpose and a meaning. To try to erase it is impossible. This effort at some kind of ethnic cleansing is foolish ... impossible ... and demeaning. The African Americans, who own this heritage, should also feel insulted. bob(deckman)nelson

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 09:36 PM

Deckman, "ethnic cleansing" means removing people of one ethnicity from a region or country. Bowdlerization of kids' books isn't "ethnic cleansing".

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 09:53 PM

It isn't ethnic cleansing in a literal sense...it's cultural cleansing...but the mindset behind it is quite similar.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 11:12 PM

Have any of you gone to NPR and listened to the author answer some of these very questions you all are bringing up? It's worth it, imo.

Here it is again with transcript: CLICK HERE.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: mousethief
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 11:20 PM

LH, the mindset behind it was to get the book back into schools. It was love of HF and wanting to see kids read it again.

You guys really are dudgeon-generating machines. Facts don't phase you.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Amergin
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 11:30 PM

Well....this would be like taking Chaucer's Summoner's Tale, and replacing all instances of the word "fart" with the word "whistle", it just doesn't have quite the same punch....

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: EBarnacle
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 11:41 PM

When my son was 7, I started reading Huck Finn to him. As soon as the word appeared on the first page, he stopped me and refused to let me continue, rejecting the book for its choice of language. Whether he would have appreciated the book at that age with cleaned up language, I don't know.

This seems to problem of switches. As soon as people see a word that they have been trained to see as inappropriate, they switch off. There is no consideration of context. When I tried to explain that the language was appropriate to people of that time and place, he rejected the answer.

If they want bowdlerization, let them read Classic Comics.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 12:21 AM

In the book, Huck suffers awfully with his guilt over doing the wrong thing. Unlike his Dad, Huck is a moral person who always tries to do what he knows is right. Time and time again, he is presented with the opportunity to do what he knows is right and lawful...turn Jim in to the authorities as a runaway slave. At last, he decides that he must have much of the evil of his Pa in him, and decides he is beyond redemption already, and so will continue to help Jim escape and find his family.
Think of what a genius Twain was. Instead of giving his character wisdom beyond his years and his culture, he shows us a character strong enough to do what his heart assures him is right, but he knows to be wrong. It was Twain's way of making us see the wrongness in the rules that society sets up for us. Huck is an anti-hero who loves himself much less than we love him.
And Twain plays the same turn-the-tables game with the use of the word nigger by Huck and others. As was said above, there was no other way of referring to black people in Huck's culture. But Nigger Jim becomes Huck's true friend, and the only adult he can understand and admire.
These are the lessons of the book, that we must do what we feel in our hearts is right, and that goes beyond any lesson about racism or use of the word nigger. And the irony that the book is banned would make even Twain chuckle. In a way, its just what he would have expected from us.
I say ban the book. Truly, we don't deserve it.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 12:53 AM

I believe it was on the Anderson Cooper Show on Tuesday night wherein three Black guests, a Democratic spokesperson/analyst of some sort, the founder of a private or charter school, and a person in the arts discussed the new, sanitized Twain. Both the educator and the artist (I think she is a writer) spoke against this concept. Only the person in politics favored the new edition. That discussion reinforced my feelings against the political intruding on art.

While I come to this thread quite late, I find that some of the comments are really spot on as to their criticism of putting out this edition.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: mousethief
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 12:58 AM

Lonesome EJ: And Twain plays the same turn-the-tables game with the use of the word nigger by Huck and others. As was said above, there was no other way of referring to black people in Huck's culture. But Nigger Jim becomes Huck's true friend, and the only adult he can understand and admire.

The best part of the whole book is where Huck says that Aunt Polly never did anything bad to him ever, "and here I am stealing her nigger." The whole upside-downness of what is right and wrong in that society (and in ours) is right there in just a few words.

Subject: Censoring Huckleberry Finn to be PC
From: Genie
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 02:01 AM

Ed T.,
It is one thing to remove offensive language from school textbooks - which get revised & updated all the time anyway - and quite another to change an author's work without his/her permission and without acknowledging that the author's work has been substantially altered.



Alex, I think you're onto something here:
"I think they should state plainly up front that the book used to be racier and has been toned down, but not say how. That will send the kids (the ones who give a crap) racing to the library to read the original! Everybody wins."

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Genie
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 02:06 AM

And, Alex, facts do faze us - when they're relevant. : )

If literature has to be modified to suit the age of the reader, etc., I can see that there's an argument to be made for that. My point is that I think when you do that, you really need to emphasize - big bold letters on the cover and inside the book and oral commentary by the teacher - that the work has been altered.
(As you say, tell the little buggers that the original had naughty words in it, and they'll rush out to find that original.)

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Genie
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 02:10 AM

And, Ernie, that was an excellent exposition of the issues - and the conclusion.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 02:47 AM

Yes it has..to the point of beyond common sense!! I think that is quite obvious!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 02:48 AM

There never was any reason to take the book out of schools. All that is required in those schools is teachers who are bright enough that they can explain to the students the real message in the story, and students who are bright enough to understand it.

But I guess that would just be asking too much, right? ;-) Impossible in modern America!

So let's not ask anyone to think. It's too hard. Let's just react to the official political trigger words of our time, regardless of context, regardless of the author's intention, and we'll all be "safe", won't we? Yup. Ignorance really IS bliss, by golly.

And while we're at it, let's remove the word "niggardly" from the dictionary too. You just can't be too safe these days.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 02:55 AM

And while we're at it, let's remove the word "niggardly" from the dictionary too." LH

Little Hawk, your bringing in 'niggardly' is paying lip service to an utter irrelevance, giving credence to the misperceptions of the illiterate and uninformed.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 03:49 AM

1. "It isn't ethnic cleansing in a literal sense...it's cultural cleansing...but the mindset behind it is quite similar."

What?

The mindset behind murdering/displacing thousands or millions of people because of their ethnicity is the same mindset as taking a word out of a book?

LH - you are going senile!



2. "let's remove the word "niggardly" from the dictionary too"


The word "nigger" is a term which exists solely as an instrument of degradation and violence and which represents the abuse murder and enslavement of millions of people over a period of hundreds of years.

The word "niggardly" measn "mean" or "ungenerous".


There is no connection between them.


Once again LH wildly misses the point - when people confuse these words they display ignorance.

When LH atttempts weakly to confuse them on purpose he makes NO point of substance but just makes a mockery of the issue of the word "nigger".


Have the debate by all means, but these kind of self indulgent and weak thought experiments do nothing more than insult the intelligence.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 03:50 AM

Ebbie is right, again...Jeez, that's twice within 48 hours! Good girl!
Nonetheless, taking Twain out is absolutely stupid..but then, we Yanks have been practicing diligently for some time, at being stupid!!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 04:04 AM

The abilities of teachers?

You pay peanuts you get monkeys.

Sorry Chongo.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 04:06 AM

It depends on what age group this book is directed at. When I was 10 in 1968, I read The Adventures of Tom Sawyer (an expurgated version, I am sure as I remember no controversial words or discussions). When I was in high school (11th grade I think) and again in American Lit in university, I read unexpergated editions of The Adventrues of Huckleberry Finn. Different things were focussed upon and discussed each time. From all the literary technical stuff to the social commentary.

Looking at it retrospectively, I was a child in a small town in south east Virginia at the height of Civil Rights movement, I think it was quite brave of my teacher Mrs. Frink to have us reading even the watered down version.   Though at the time, I did not make connections to what was happening politically in my own town, which was school desegregation.

Actually I think the reprint and the media storm it causes might be a good thing. It will set people talking about the issues surrounding socially acceptable literature and the corruption of literary art. I would like to see teachers using both versions in the classroom and discussing the historical, social and literary implications of such changes.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Green Man
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 05:09 AM

All references in Shakespeare to 'Blackamores' will be changed to 'person of a dusky countenance'. Of course this won't change the context or feraal of the original text will it. (That's Irony)

The rewriting of history and books to hide past misdemeanours only deprives new generations of the truth of the situation as it was.

We have to learn from history or else we are doomed to reapeat it.

Will changing this book stop rascism, not likely. Amazing, people actually get paid to do this sort of thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 05:26 AM

Little Hawk I agree with what you said about Cuba, admittedly I only went there for the first time last year as a tourist but yes I noticed that there didn't seem to be any friction with anyone at all. Even when some Brits were discourteous and rude (I was really ashamed of thankfully a few for being so rude), they kept their calm and stayed courteous throughout. But the ethnic mixtures in Cuba appeared to get along fine in that particular hotel anyway from the Management, general staff to the dance entertainment. Travelling through the town of Moron it seemed to be friendly enough, but very poor, people have to travel great distances to get work whatever the colour.

Back to political correctness gone too far, how can classic lines of a book be changed? Most people will accept that society was different then and accept it for what it was with the language of the time as we do with Enid Blyton or opt not to read it at all. If teachers are any good at what they do they should be able guide youngsters through it. But going back to the another thread about reading statistics are the general public young or old going to be bothered to read it at all?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 05:26 AM

So this has been going on since at least 1968.

thats more than 40 years.

Exactly how is this either current or any more controversial than it ever was before?

As usual, the headline "political correctness gone mad" is underscored by a pile of meaningless drivel.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 05:39 AM

Many books have been sanitised over the years, including Agatha Christie, Enid Blyton etc, so Twain is not the only one to lay in his grave gnashing his teeth...

Yes, I think it is sad that this has been done. Although the work is fiction, it represents a time and place and gives a backdrop to true history, as all historical novels written contemporaneously have done, although this was better written than most! Basically, this is revisionism and that just won't do.

I am loathe to sign up to a statement such as "political correctness gone too far!" though, as it is uncomfortably similar to headlines in the more seedy of UK tabloid newspapers. (Substitute "too far" with "mad" but the meaning remains similar.)

Douglas Bader was a war hero and has been lauded in books and films. Only the very early books and films noted that his dog was called Nigger though. We had neighbours when I was a lad who had a dog of that name. He kept buggering off and all the kids on the street used to wander down the road and nearby fields calling him.... me included.

Why do I mention this? Because innocence is just that. I had no idea of the derogatory use of the word till I went to the "big" school. If we hide behind offence, we learn to be offended.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 05:50 AM

I would reiterate the point that I have made in previous threads, which is that as a historical document, and for the sake of the authenticity of the novel, it should be preserved in its original form and protected as the work of art that it clearly is.

This applies as much to Joseph Conrad whose use of "nigger" was not remotely sympathetic in the way that Twains was.

In the long run, the original version will stand the test of time, while the watered down versions will come and go and end up being recycled.

The watered down versions have been around for ages and the originals have not gone anywhere so it can be observed that they haven't served in any way to "update" or "replace" the originals.

They have served as gateways to literature for kids and incentives to read, which is a wholly positive thing.


So Ake and his ilk can go around taking the opportunity to Bash Azizi and go on and on publicly and unfettered about how the "liberals" are taking away his freedom of speech, but thankfully they, like the bowdlerized versions of old novels, will be of little significance to the world in the long run.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:19 AM

I think you'll find that "Nigger" was Dambuster Guy Gibson's black Labrador, who was killed when he ran into the road in front of a car, while the squadron were carrying out the Dams Raid.

Bader, as far as I recall owned either Retrievers or Setters, but don't quote me on that.

Nonetheless, your comments are entirely valid IMO, since there was never any malice in the use of that word in the UK at that time.

Later, with the influx of immigrants mainly from the Caribbean, racial tensions did arise but, even then I rarely heard the N word used.

Mostly I remember signs in windows of rental accomodation and boarding houses, which said "No Coloureds", and strangely (which has almost been forgotten) also "No Irish".

Conversational references I overheard usually involved the words "Black", "Coloured", or "Darkie".

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:20 AM

Willie - wasn't it Guy Gibson's (Leader of RAF 617 Squadron in the Dams raid and after) dog who was called 'Nigger'? Maybe they both had a Nigger?

Gibson's Nigger was killed by a car the night before the dams raid, and buried by the gates of Scampton airfield (the legend goes that he was buried at midnight while Gibson was on the dams raid, Gibson's thought being that he and Nigger might well be going into the ground at the same time). There used to be a stone marking Nigger's grave by the roadside years ago, but not any more.

Not really anything to do with this thread, but interesting local (for me) history.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:21 AM

Sorry Don, you just beat me to it!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:48 AM

"there was never any malice in the use of that word in the UK at that time."

This misses the point.

Yes it was normal for the word Nigger to be used.

It was also normal, in that context, for Black people to be second class citizens.

It was normal for black people to be denied the vote.


For most people this was accepted reality without any sense of Malice behind it.


But in hindsight we are able to say that it was not the right way to do things.


So we abolished that society.


And in the process we abolished the "normal" social/political category of "Nigger".


"nigger" was a normal everyday social demographic and the word was a normal everyday word for that reason, said without Malice, but also without awareness of what it meant and misery and wretchedness that it represented.


These days we are aware so that excuse doesn't apply any more.


Keep the books - they are important and have historical and cultural value as well as itrinsic artistic value and shouldn't be censored any more than painting depicting "niggers" should.


But all this talk of "political correctness gone mad" is basically nothiing more than stubborn refusal to let go, to face up to the past and to move on.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:58 AM

Yep, if you say it was Guy Gibson, then I stand corrected. Sorry.

I genuinely thought for years that Bader had a dog of that name. You live and learn...

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 07:14 AM

I read 'The Dam Busters' and 'Reach For The Sky' at least five times each as a lad, Willie. Some stuff sticks at that tender age! There wasn't a lot at that time to occupy a lad out here in the Backwoods! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Brian May
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 08:00 AM

Wow, how pleasant so many people agreeing with the premise made in the title.

Welcome to my world.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: EBarnacle
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 08:09 AM

VT, what bothers me is that the bowdlerized book will still be around after the hubbub dies down. Once the sound and fury go away, there will be many people who will have read the book in this form with no awareness that there was ever another version.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: fat B****rd
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 08:21 AM

Does this mean 'Injun Joe' is acceptable?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Black belt caterpillar wrestler
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 08:29 AM

Why not face up to the fact that words have changed meanings and insinuations as time changes. This is a history lesson in itself and is part of the process of understanding the book.

At the time it was written common awareness was just starting to realise that the term was considered repugnant by a minor part of the population.

There are other words that have had changed meanings over the years such as gay. Do we have to re-write all the books that used that word other than in the context of a sexual one.

I have to put up with all those books that claim that there is a God. Will they all be banned some time in the future?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 08:47 AM

I have heard the word is commonly used among the young black community as a term of affection....suppose someone better tell them its to be banned.

No word from you "liberals" on the younng white girls being groomed and sexually assaulted by Pakistani muslim gangs in the UK and even larger numbers in the Netherlands?

This is going to shake the "human rights" act to its core, soon all the hypocrisy will be exposed.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Neil D
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 08:58 AM

"(BTW, are they changing Injun Joe to "Native-American Joe" or "First-Nations Joe" in Tom Sawyer?)"

Actually, I heard that he had removed the word "Injun" but I don't know what he replaced it with.

'The best part of the whole book is where Huck says that Aunt Polly never did anything bad to him ever, "and here I am stealing her nigger." The whole upside-downness of what is right and wrong in that society (and in ours) is right there in just a few words.'

You make a good point but the pedant in me has to point out that Jim belonged to the Widder Douglas, not to Tom's Aunt Polly.


I've seen several movie versions of Huckleberry Finn and none of them use the word. At the same time, none of them adequately portray Huck's inner turmoil, and ultimate decision, which is at the soul of the book.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 09:06 AM

"I have heard the word is commonly used among the young black community as a term of affection"

You never grow or learn anything.

This stuff has been really thoroughly and rigourously explored on this site a million times and you were there Ake.

But because you walk around with your fingers in your ears shouting LALALA and brandishing the stats on the number of homosexuals suffering with HIV/AIDS as your "prove all" universal evidence Key, you insist on taking us tound and round in circles.


But lets look at something else.



"No word from you "liberals" on the younng white girls being groomed and sexually assaulted by Pakistani muslim gangs in the UK and even larger numbers in the Netherlands?"



Source?



and while you're dredging up whatever Daily Mail article you got this crap from (or was it the BNP manifesto) why don't you ansewr this question ....



... what the Fuck does this have to do with Mark Twain?



You mate are as full on a bigot as I have ever had the displeasure to waste my time engaging with.


I'm just grateful that I don't have to be you so I never have to Wallow in the putrid filth that forms your consciousness.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 09:18 AM

By excising that word, the book can get back into schools...the mindset behind it was to get the book back into schools....

Ah, but you see, it should never have been taken OUT of the schools in the first place. Take it up with the schools/school boards instead of emasculating the book.

Also, its necessary to realize that Huck. Finn is NOT A "CHILDRENS BOOK"!- at the age people can understand and appreciate the book, the language is not a problem..

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: EBarnacle
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 09:45 AM

Greg, that's the key. As was said above, the politicians seem to be the ones most upset by the use of the language.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 09:50 AM

Sure enough, a bit of research and the truth is swiftly uncovered.

1. The two papers reporting Ake's slur on Pakistanis are ... Guess ... the Sun and The Mail.

What a surprise.

2. Ake has been spectacularly consistent in his selective misreading of the report which the two papers above refer to.

In fact there are no Pakistanis gooming white girls in the netherlands, but the report COMPARED recent crimes in Rotherham with crimes committed by MORROCCAN pimps in holland.


And on the matter of the gangsters in Rotherham, 53 were Jailed.


No human rights law was involved at any stage, and it certainly did not influence the convictions of the gangsters in question.


So Ake's comment that "This is going to shake the "human rights" act to its core" is not only bullshit, it is wholly and utterly irrelevant.


FW is back and this time he's got both guns blazing ... into his feet!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 10:49 AM

I note that the phrase 'mental' is used widely too, even in children's programmes in a flippant way which in reality is not so pleasant for the sufferer or families. It seems that this area is still a subject of light-hearted amusement. I am not saying that it shouldn't be mentioned at all but not in a derogatory way.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: katlaughing
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 11:09 AM

All that is required in those schools is teachers who are bright enough that they can explain to the students the real message in the story, and students who are bright enough to understand it.

That is really a naive view, imo. Teachers do not have that kind of leeway in what they are expected to teach!

Have any of you read the transcript?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 11:28 AM

Teachers do not have that kind of leeway in what they are expected to teach!

That's a political and practical problem to be taken up with school boards, school administrators and curriculum developers, Kat- not a question about censoring/bowlderizing literature.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 11:30 AM

Too true, Kat. In fact, many books on the ``allowed to teach it list`` came with the caveat that the final arbiter would be so-called community values, whatever the hell that means. It was just the Dept of Ed covering its rear and leaving teachers to decide. It was The DoE`s way of saying that the teacher was on his or her own should it all hit the fan.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: mousethief
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 11:42 AM

ake: No word from you "liberals" on the younng white girls being groomed and sexually assaulted by Pakistani muslim gangs in the UK and even larger numbers in the Netherlands?

The old "you don't object to all offenses so you're a hypocrite to object to any" ploy is so old. Find another.

Neil D: You make a good point but the pedant in me has to point out that Jim belonged to the Widder Douglas, not to Tom's Aunt Polly.

My mistake. It's been a while, but at least I got to read it in school. Which millions of kids won't get to do unless an expurgated version is made available. Them's just the facts. The literary purists need to pull up their big girl panties and deal.

Greg F: Ah, but you see, it should never have been taken OUT of the schools in the first place. Take it up with the schools/school boards instead of emasculating the book.

Thaaaaat's Niiiiiice. We need to deal with the reality we have, not one we'd like to have. And it doesn't look to be changing any time soon. By your purism you deny millions of children the chance to read a fine book.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 11:55 AM

In university, I studied various of The Bard`s plays for a term. Amongst them was `Hamlet`. I noticed--with the help of a great teacher--that the play had been changed somewhat. In the scene with Ophelia, Hamlet--with his head on her lap said `Oh, you with your C`s, U`s `n` T`s. The only Collection I ever found that as Shakespeare wrote it was in The Complete Works of Shakespeare published by Pelican.

I don`t know what that means, but censorship sure is strange stuff, considering that few if any high school students would ever even notice what Shakespeare had done.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 11:56 AM

Thanks for doing the work, Lox.

ake, you say: "No word from you "liberals" on the younng white girls being groomed and sexually assaulted by Pakistani muslim gangs in the UK and even larger numbers in the Netherlands?"

Even if Lox had not exposed your shallow, pot-stirring claim, don't you realize that the crime would not be worse because young white girls were "being groomed and sexually assaulted"?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Becca72
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 12:23 PM

Genie: (BTW, are they changing Injun Joe to "Native-American Joe" or "First-Nations Joe" in Tom Sawyer?)

They are changing it to "Indian Joe" according to the report on the Today Show...

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 01:12 PM

999 ~~'The Cs Us Ts great Ps' joke actually occurs, not in the Ophelia play-scene dialogue in Hamlet, but in Malvolio's letter scene in Twelfth Night.
====
Lox ~~ "1. The two papers reporting Ake's slur on Pakistanis are ... Guess ... the Sun and The Mail."

Purely as a matter of fact and suggesting no other comment on the topic, THIS WAS THE LEAD STORY IN THIS MORNING'S 'TIMES'.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 01:17 PM

Geeze, corrected once more. Thank you. That said, it does NOT appear in any high school plays I`ve encountered. Knowing you, what you said is accurate. Don`t know how I screwed it up. Age and aluminium I guess. Thanks again.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 01:24 PM

Guys..... ;-)

My reference to the word "niggardly" was a deliberately sarcastic reminder about the ridiculous media row that erupted a few years ago (in New York?) when some local politican or city employee used the term "niggardly" in a speech he was making.

Despite the fact that the word has absolutely nothing to do with Black people, it was interpreted as an attack on Black people by many in the local Black community, and with a little help from the media, they managed to blow it up into a huge row. They demanded the man's resignation because he had used a "racist" term! They were quite unaware that the word "niggardly" is from Scottish origins, it means "cheap" or "stingy", and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with the word "nigger" and does not refer to Blacks.

And that is why I brought the matter up. I was simply pointing out how ignorance and knee-jerk reactions by various people who have no idea what's actually going on in a book or in a statement are the kind of thing that's driving the agenda a lot of the time these days. They react to the mental trigger....they don't undestand the actual context or the meaning of what's happening...and therein lies the problem. They just react to outward triggers, they don't think or bother to eductate themselves.

This is also called "judging the book by its cover", and it's a very common human failing.

Get it now? No, I am not getting "senile", Lox, I am making a point that you misunderstood, that's all. ;-) Ease up, buddy. Part of what makes a good discussion is to realize that you aren't the only intelligent being who's taking part in it, that people with a different opinion are not necessarily drooling morons or racists.... and have respect for the people you are talking to. I know you're a smart guy, and you're not senile. That's true of me also.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 01:28 PM

Pardon the typos, by the way. I should proofread before hitting "submit". It's not a sign of senility...it's a sign of haste. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 01:35 PM

Excerpt from editorial in New York Times:
"We are horrified, and we think most readers, textural purists or not, will be horrified too. The trouble isn't merely adulterating Twain's text. It's also adulterating social, economic and linguistic history. Substituting the word "slave" makes it sound as though all the offense lies in the "n-word" and has nothing to do with the institution of slavery. Worse, it suggests that understanding the truth of the past corrupts modern readers, when, in fact, this new edition is busy corrupting the past."

Editorial
"That's Not Twain
Published January 5, 2011

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 01:42 PM

An interesting perspective below. I especially like the suggestion of leaving the text as is and including historic background material on racism and slavery somewhere to explain the historical context. How would that hurt?


http://www.maryvilledailyforum.com/features/x1599396111/Teacher-sees-Twain-s-N-word-as-problematic

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 02:40 PM

MtheGM,

Well thanks for that,

Akes claim that Pakistanis were doing anything in the netherlands was still incorrect and the perpetrators convictions were still never affected by the human rights act so his post is still bollocks.

So whats your point?


ps -
here's the front page of Times online and it isn't the "lead story" as you claim


"bloody foreigners - coming over here and raping white girls" ...

... is that it?




LH - yes everyone has a different point of view.

But some points of view are dangerous, unsupportable, and founded on hatred and lies and promote hatred and lies.

Those points of view should be met with no tolerance.

In the war of ideas, no quarter should ever be given to destructive crap like the insinuations made by Ake etc.


And yes there are many people out there who are intelligent who hold different points of view to me.

They are the most dangerous and the most able to sell and package evil bullshit as "reasonable".

Thankfully none of the bullshit mongers on here have that much wit.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 03:23 PM

By your purism you deny millions of children the chance to read a fine book.

Not so, Mouse. By being true to the original text, I'm trying to prevent millions of children - children old enough to understand and appreciate the book- from reading a bowderized piece of crap that was a fine book before the censors got their hands on it.

The REALITY is to correct this, people need to del with the sourc of th problem: The school boards, the school administrators, etc. - not the text of what, as you rightly state- is a fine book.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 03:27 PM

I suggest an experiment to see if the "N" word is offensive anymore, or just another word?

The test would be to say it to the next black person you see. Then, let us all know how it worked out?

:)

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 03:48 PM

Many years ago in the far reaches of time I taught English literature to high school students. At one point a peer (read fellow(ette) teacher) was receiving severe flak from a parent group. I also did because I had used The Stone Angel written by Margaret Laurence. The parents were objecting to the sex scene in the novel. Folks, there IS no sex scene in the novel. Laurence alludes to it as happening in a room next door--details not provided. So, I requested a clearer explanation of what the `charges` were and would they allow me to present small portions of books that I used to teach literature to students. (I will admit that at the time I used The Bible--a book I perceive to be literature. That was verboten in a non-Catholic public school.) I chose material and a few days later met with the parents and gave each a three-page handout containing quotations from various books: then I told them where each had come from. I then suggested we ban all the books I`d put forward. Of course, amongst the books were The Bible--I think I used the New Jerusalem version--and it was some writing from Song of Songs from the Old Testament. Those passages got a bit steamy. And Twain, and Laurence, and Atwood, and Munro and others. Often, people ban (or try to) books and films they haven`t read or seen. I agree that some are NOT appropriate at certain grade levels. However, as has been stated often on this thread, just because someone doesn`t like it doesn`t mean it`s bad.

In one class I read from Dick Gregory`s book, `Nigger` and asked the kids what should be done about the title. Recall that the dedication in that book was to his mother. He wrote, `Dear Mama (or words to that effect), the next time you hear the word `nigger` remember that they`re advertising my book.`

Intention in the use of words is important. Twain`s intention was NOT to slag Black people. He too was a subject of his times.

I fail to see--for example--why many parents will allow kids to watch movies that are rated PG-13 when there are scenes of violence and fairly explicit sex and lotsa language, and again people are going after literature. Sheesh.

Best to you all.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 04:14 PM

Lighten up, Lox. My point is simply dedication to accuracy of fact, as I said. I do not read The Times online: I am old-fashioned & read the print edition. The headline on yesterday's was "Revealed conspiracy of silence on UK sex gangs: Most convicted offenders of Pakistani heritage". Today's headline continues the story with reactions of politicians to yesterday's Times revelations; headline: "Calls for action on 'grotesque' sex gangs": and goes on to report reactions of Nick Clegg and Keith Vaz to [& HERE I QUOTE VERBATIM]"the pattern of offending uncovered in The Times, mostly involving British Pakistani men".

These are straight quotes, Lox; you will find them on p1 of yesterday's and today's Times. My point, as I said, was simply to refute your INACCURATE assertion that only The Sun & The Mail had covered this story. As I said, I had NO FURTHER POINT TO MAKE. YOU DON'T HELP YOUR OWN ARGUMENT BY PROTESTING TOO MUCH, YOU KNOW. I daresay you are an intelligent fellow; some people seem to take your asseverations seriously. But you appear to me all too often as one whose motto is "My mind is made up: do not confuse me with facts".

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: gnu
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 04:15 PM

Well said, 999... and I would add the violent video games.

They are allowed but teaching history in actuality is not. Sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 04:45 PM

MICHAEL....Thank you for trying to bring Lox up to speed, I suppose he finds it hard to actually read the papers through the froth.

You are quite correct
The Times Jan 5....Full front page.
                   Leader editorial, 4 full pages inside.

The Times Jan 6....Half front page.
                   2 Pages inside.

I read neither the Sun nor the Daily Mail.

"A culture of silence, which has facilitated the sexual exploitation of hundreds of young British girls, is exposed in todays Times.
On street grooming has led to criminal convictions for 56 men in 17 court cases, in towns across the North of England.
The Times investigation has found that the victims were young white girls aged from 11 to 16.
Of the 56 convictions, 3 were white men and 53 were Pakistani, of that 53, 50 were Muslim.

A senior West Mercia police officer has told the Times, that those convicted represent only a small proportion of what is described as "a tidal wave" of offending, which has been uncovered in the North of England.

Other Police sources have called for an end to the damaging taboo surrounding gang led on street grooming, which they blame on the fear by police and child protection workers, of being branded "racist"
"To stop this sort of crime,you need to start talking about it, but everyone has been too scared to expose the ethnicity factor.
No one wants to stand up and say that in some parts of the country, Pakistanis are recruiting young white girls and passing them round their relatives for sex, but we need to stop worrying about the racial complication"

In the Netherlands, 1500 young Dutch girls have been sexually exploited by Morrocan and Turkish muslims in the same pattern as is occuring in the UK, the girls being typically 12 to 16 years of age. they are groomed then used as sex objects by male muslims and their relatives.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 04:46 PM

... and here is another, online, one, Lox, from

Telegraph.co.uk

'Cover up' claims over Asian sex gangs
Charities and agencies working with victims of sexual abuse have been accused of covering up the role of British Pakistani Muslims in sexually exploiting young white British girls.

Charities and agencies working with victims of sexual abuse have been accused of covering up the role of British Pakistani Muslims in sexually exploiting young white British girls.
Most agencies have publicly denied a link between ethnicity and the grooming of vulnerable girls as young as 11 on streets by criminal gangs of pimps.
=====
Still going to assert that it's only the Mail & The Sun?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 04:57 PM

Lox - Your fight with Akenaton is up to you and him. I was not commenting on that, I was only referring to your rather extreme reaction to the entirely satirical post I made quite some time ago about the hypothetical situation of people censoring the word "niggardly" out of books on the supposition that it was a racist attack of some sort...

I was strictly being humorous and engaging in some pointed political satire when I said that, not being literal, and I was referring back to an actual protest incident that occurred fairly recently over a public figure's innocent use of the word "niggardly"...a protest fueled by ignorance and misunderstanding on the part of the protestors. We had a thread going about it at the time, but I don't know what the title of that thread was.

*********

I don't believe for a moment that there is anyone in this conversation who is in favor of or promoting racism in any way. There are simply 2 sets of people here with 2 primary sets of concerns foremost in their minds, one of those sets momentarily trumping the other in each person.

1. Those who are concerned that Black people should not be stigmatized, treated unequally, or verbally insulted. That includes everyone here, in my opinion.

2. Those who are concerned that Mark Twain's brilliant book about Huck Finn should not be bowdlerized in a spirit of fear over a particular word which is in the book because Twain wrote honestly and accurately about the rural society of the early 1800s. And who feel that the book would actually enlighten the reader...as Twain was very much defending the rights and natural equality of Black people in that book.

Both sets of concerns are entirely legitimate. Both sets of people are entirely well intentioned.

The only reason we have these disagreements here is that some people's emotional gut reaction leaps to issue number 1 FIRST, and they mainly focus on that...

And some other people's emotional gut reaction leaps to issue number 2 FIRST, and they mainly focus on that...

Step 3 is: Everyone who originally decided to take up one side of the argument for some reason gets more and more vociferous, defensive, and intransigent defending their own position...and if they are also rather emotionally immature in a certain sense or just unable to control their own negativity, then they quickly move to step 4....

Step 4: Personally attacking the people on the other side of the argument, calling them stupid, calling them senile, calling them racist, calling them fascist, whatever... and thereby reducing them to some dumb stereotype of evil or stupidity.

And that leads us directly to step 5...

Step 5: The entire thread and the conversation is now well and truly derailed by the emotional immaturity of certain posters who cannot avoid falling into the deep emotional reactivity of step 4, and you can basically take the thread and flush it down the toilet now, because all hopes of reasonable dialogue have pretty well gone down the drain anyway.

The above unfortunate tale is what eventually happens on most political, social, and religious threads here, and it is that which makes this place, by turns, either sadly hilarious, boring, or just plain tragic.

It's also, frankly, a total waste of a person's time, and if I wasn't seriously addicted to chatting here on a daily basis just for something to do, I'd have left it long ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 05:02 PM

That will be three apologies which I am owed by Lox, but I shall not hold my breath....or my tongue!

Ebbie if you wish to continue with your shit stirring, please try to find a stooge who actually knows what he is talking about.

You and Lox seem to be a match made in hell.....thats twice the pair of you have ended up with an omelette between the eyes.

Time to give the stiletto a spell on the grindstone?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 05:12 PM

BTW....I am against neither "Pakistanis", "Morroccans" nor "Turks",
I am against "liberal hypocrisy", both in the censorship of our literary heritage.....and in matters of race or religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 05:44 PM

There's another aspect of this that is bothersome... That is if we allow Mark Twain to be sanitized then what next??? Paint over the nude portions of the old masters in the art museums??? How about a towel for Michelangelo's "David"???

I mean, the Smithsonian just had to remove an art film because the art nazis complained that there was an 8 second portion that showed a crucified Christ in the4 background with ants crawling on it???

I mean, lets leave art to be just that: art...

"And the colored girls sang..."

Opps, "And the African American women sang"...

Give me a break...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 05:45 PM

Because it's about a couple of kids, the Twain books are seen a "children's books" by most people. They can be read at that level, perhaps, but it may require more maturity for most students to understand that words have different meanings in different contexts and it is necessary to know how they were used at a given time in order to understand things written in a given time.

The meanings and emotions attending the word being removed have changed significantly, and many "kids," at the ages where academics want to "teach" them, may be unprepared to understand the changes - as they're usually "taught."

The replacement word has a much narrower meaning that has not changed significantly, and appears to me to be an attempt to restore unambiguous pejorative connotations to all references to Jim. Since you can't read the books without knowing that he's also black - and with consideration of where the change is being made - I suspect that to some degree it comes from an intent to reemphasise his (and by inference all other of his race) inferiority. That it changes the meaning of the book, and makes it even more difficult for immature students to understand the points Twain made, is immaterial to those (down South?) who take comfort in a new way to (subtly?) express their prejudices.

If the "offensive" word needs to be changed to permit it to be "taught"(?) to kids too immature to understand how the word was used, the replacement is an incredibly poor choice. It also trivializes the multiple ways in which Twain used the original word; but it would require finding different appropriate replacements specific to each usage by Twain to even suggest the multiple connotations and meaning(s) in the original. By attempting to use a single (clearly pejorative) word in all places, the bowdlerization cannot avoid emphasizing the "n...s were and always will be inferior" while pretending to be unprejudiced.

Similarly, the "Wizard of Ooze" (the movie) is a quite innocent children's tale, but the "Wizard of Oz" (the book) was a very adult, bitter, POLITICAL satire that few mature academics can fully understand simply because the "victims" it assaults are now mostly unrecognizable.

"Gulliver's Travels" is pandered about as a good story for kids, but was again political satire that almost nobody can understand. Many of those attacked were French(?) and British(?), where the politics were too complex (and mostly too trivial) for anybody to care to remember.

I knew kids in my high school who knew that "the feathers from a newly downed goose" made the best "arse wipe," but there's no way "Gargantua and Pantagruel" should be gratuitously left where other than the most precocious kids below the age of 50 can poke about in it.

At 10, the kids should be reading the collected writings of Sigmund Freud - like I did - so that by the time they're 16 or so they'll understand why Ana said "Daddy was a nut." At about 12 my son read some Camus (it was the skinniest book I had handy when he needed a book report). He got it but maybe it's part of the reason he's been "a little a'port of a straight course" since, so I'd suggest maybe it's a little advanced for most kids.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:08 PM

"calling them stupid, calling them senile, calling them racist, calling them fascist, whatever"

I never heard anyone calling anyone here the "n" word yet....IMO, just to make it "historically accurate", one needs to do that. There is no other way. :)

As to covering over the nude (or was it naked) art..that is a reddd herring (one short of a herring salad). and, possibly as dead a fish as the dead drumfish in Arkansas. :))

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:09 PM

Ake and MtheGM,

Well done.


You have shown that the report was reported in more newspapers than the Sun and the Mail.


Great.



Ake,


You also claimed "This is going to shake the "human rights" act to its core"



The human rights act has nothing to do with this report.



Noone has invoked the human rights act, or got away with anything because of the human rights act.



Which makes it irrelevant.



Which makes Ake's reference to it BULLSHIT.



Some Gangsters get caught and arrested and this is meant to "shake the "human rights" act to its core"



Duh!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:10 PM

Ake says,

"taking too much satisfaction in the suffering of her people.
That in itself is a type of racism."

thus accusing Azizi, bniot here to defend herself of Racism.


Apology? to a spineless turd like you? Don't make me laugh!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: gnu
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:15 PM

Here we go again. It's getting tiresome. And a tad more than silly.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:19 PM

Dont blame me gnu, I dont respond to either Lox or Don T.

and you're on my "short list"....   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:33 PM

"No word from you "liberals" on the younng white girls being groomed and sexually assaulted by Pakistani muslim gangs in the UK and even larger numbers in the Netherlands?"

You haven't answered - what the fuck does this have to do with Mark Twain?


Oh no - I remember - its a discussion vaguely centred around race.


A fiver for anyone who can spot any other connection.



VT points out very astutely that you are particularly concerned about the plight of 'White' girls.


Do they merit attention that other girls don't


So it would seem.


And how about the 1500 girls kidnapped by Morroccans and Turks 'fact'


Well the only sites that come up with this info are 4freedoms, who on their homepage are promoting the next EDL: march, and SKADI.net, which is a self proclaimed english speaking online Germanic community, most of whose posts talk about inbreeding brown mongrels.


But no - Ake, with MtheGM's courageous help, has proved beyond doubt ...

... that the report about the convictions in rotherham was printed in more papers than the sun and the Mail.


In the face of such overwhelming research, I have no choice but to stick two fingers up.


Racist Troll.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: gnu
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:50 PM

ake... you only show up on one list of mine and you know what that list is.

Having said that, if you actually did play devil's advocate with the intent to illicit intense discussion I would applaud your efforts.

But, I know that is not the case. It is only a side effect. Still, you may serve a purpose, much as a pimple on the ass of the lathargic.

Oh my.... I think I may have just complimented ake. Oh dear me.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 07:05 PM

Well pimple or otherwise, I don't know of anyone else who uses ultra right wing websites to back up their claim that they aren't racist.

What a waste of binary.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 07:42 PM

Let's forget Ake fir the moment...

Who is gonna go thru all the movies that have been made in the last 40 years and dub in acceptable substitutes for "fuck", "motherfuckers", G.damned, etc.' etc???

(The same guy who is gonna spray paint over the private parts in the those paintings hangion' in the National Gallery, Boberdz...)

Hmmmmm??? I thought so...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 08:42 PM

Nice try on the niggardly comment, Little Hawk. And they say irony is a lost art. I suppose they're right.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: andrew e
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 09:15 PM

What's the problem?

If you don't want "slave", buy the other editions!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 09:24 PM

I suspecyted you all along Bobart. It was you who spray painted the red on the blackbirds wings, that killed 'em off. Stay away from me, if you plan to spray paint my private parts. What may be OK for the Vine, is not fer the fruits of the Vine. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 09:29 PM

Problem, which should be blazingly obvious to anybody who actually thinks about it, is that if school districts buy the bowdlerized version, the education of kids who read it is shortchanged.

It's good for kids to grapple with the problems of language sensitivity--and to get a true reflection of racial attitudes at the time Twain was writing.

Of course teachers need to play a crucial role here--and if teachers don't have the leeway to explain the use of "nigger" in historical and social context, that is what really needs to change.

To accept less than 1) teaching the book (Huck) and 2) teaching it as originally written is an abdication of responsibility by society, a travesty of Twain---and a shining example of PC stupidity--as noted in the opening post.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 09:44 PM

The story of the moroccan "loverboys" comes from the Autobiography of "Maria Mosterd" (2008) entitled "real men don't eat cheese"

This book became a bestseller and the author went on to do talks around schools etc and her and her mother did rather well finacially out of it and in the process they raised awarenesss of the issue.

Then investigative journalists Peter R. de Vries and a colleague of his wrote an expose of the book, which found numerous inconsiistencies and inaccuracies in the book which led them to believe that it was a fraud and that "loverboys" were a fictional stereotype.

The only relevant supportable bit of info is that about 87% of Amsterdams pimps are of Turkish origin.



There remains no connection between any of this information and the human rights act, nor with Mark Twains books.



In the absence of such connections, it remains true that Akes insertion of irrelevant informatiion about unconnected ethnic minorities into a discussion loosely based on race, serves only one purpose and that is to make insinuations about "Pakistani Moslems".

He may be doing this deliberately to wind people up, or he may be doing it because he has a problem with Pakistani Moslems.

Based on his comments in another thread where he asserted (based on a chat with a goan friend) that Moslems think they're better than "us" and that is why they don't want to integrate with british society, it seems consistent that he has a problemm with Pakistani Moslems and that he covers it up with unconvincing diatribes about "liberals".


I'm out of this thread - hope you all have fun.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: EBarnacle
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 11:54 PM

Folks, let's try to keep the personal flames out of this thread and stick to the issue of censorship and its effects. If you wish to fight, please go elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: robinia
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 02:24 AM

Was I the only one who read, at the close of the NPR Huck Finn discussion, a comment from Mark Twain himself on the subject of "unsuitable" early reading? I THINK it was there that Twain was quoted to the effect that his young mind had, alas, been coarsened by the low language of the unexpurgated Bible!   I wish I could remember his exact words, which I'm very feebly abridging here. They were the best part of the whole discussion.

PS My apologies if this is a duplicate posting -- tried unsuccessfully to post before...

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 03:27 AM

Well eBarnicle, I think the single issue of censorship of literature is almost completely opposed in this forum.
It is obviously wrong from a cultural point of view, and there is little needs to be said on that issue.

However the issue of institutional silence/censorship of thought/political correctness, is a much wider and perhaps much more relevant issue.
Discussion of these issues brings a totally different reaction from these pages, as discussion of subjects like "multiculturalism", "rights of minorities" etc bring into question the whole "liberal" ideology, which most here subscribe to.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Penny S.
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 05:42 AM

Linking the idea of schools using expurgated editions of literature and Hamlet, above, I "did" Hamlet at A Level, and only discovered when I bought my own, university level, annotated copy, that there was something rude about what was said when Hamlet asked if he could lay his head in Ophelia's lap, and she replied that she did not know he meant country matters. Being somewhat shielded from basic vocabulary, I was able to correctly interpret the phrase as meaning sex by thinking of farmers' daughters observing animals in fields, without spotting the pun at all.

My A Level teacher would have had fits had this been exposed in class. She had enough trouble explaining the difference between "sensual" and "sensuous", and why one applied to Keats, and the other didn't. Byron was waved away with relief as she didn't have to teach him, except to point out with distaste that the word which didn't apply to Keats did apply to him.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 06:43 AM

Surely we should accept that there are some works that should be censored or at least restricted in circulation. I know this is a shibboleth for USAians in general (whoops, there I go stereotyping) but two examples I have in mind would be "Mein Kampf" and "The Klansman".

Where Ake fails is in failing to observe that no case of statistical significance has been made regarding the racial characteristics he purports to perceive. What he reports seem to be three anecdotal observations. Not only is no statistical significance made out but also no causative relationship (whether as a matter of race or religion) is made out. All exploitation ought to be take seriously, whether it is sexual or other, and in the case of sexual exploitation, regardless of the race or sex of the exploiter or exploitee - but at the same time people have complex liberties and the difficulty is to evaluate the boundary at which one person's liberty unacceptably impinges upon that of another.

I would also observe that unless I have in haste misread, Ake cites the Sun, the Mail, the Times and the Telegraph - all of which are keen to seize on items for reportage that may be prayed in aid of a right-wing agenda, and the difference between two newspapers read by bigots and four newspapers read by bigots is hardly huge.   The Times alas has long fallen from its perch as an impartial reporter.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 07:27 AM

Richard, I only read the Times, and did not cite any other paper.
I'm sure all papers carried this major story to some extent.

Although the Times is to the right politically, it is also very "liberal" in its treatment of social issues....much too "liberal" for my taste, and much too far right politically.

The issue is not the nationality of the criminals, as I thought I had made clear, but the religious convictions which cause them to see us.....atheists and Christians, as weak, dissolute and immoral.
They may be correct in that assessment,but that does not give them the "right" to exploit our children.

I dont suppose any of the abused girls were Muslims?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 07:52 AM

Actually, now that you're asking:

I did a lot of research on this last night.

The total estimated number of underage girls being abused in the sex trade in Holland is between 1000 and 1500.

Of these, many are smuggled in through Turkey (hence the dominance of Turkish Pimps) from Africa, in Particular from Ghana, but some from Nigeria.

This does not reflect the full range however as there are in fact girls forced into prostitution from all backgrounds due to the amount of demand.

In fact 80% of prostiitutes in Holland are foreigners.

But wait - What was that? - Did I say demand?

Yes - these girls are not just exploited by their pimps, but by the customers who pay to abuse them.

Holiday makers?

"The uncomfortable truth, though, is that most men who pay for sex are just "regular guys" — colleagues, brothers, fathers, sons and lovers."

The Times Online


And presumably these guys will be the first to hang a rope from the nearest tree when they find a "Moslem" pimp.




Oh yes - and one more thing ...

... this piece of filth ...


"the religious convictions which cause them to see us.....atheists and Christians, as weak, dissolute and immoral.
They may be correct in that assessment,but that does not give them the "right" to exploit our children."



In other words it is Islam that is responsible for these crimes.

In other words these Gangs represent the truth about Islam.


There are 1.5 million Moslems in Britain.

53 were convicted of of pimping teenage girls.


Therefore we can conclude that Islam is the root of 53 men abusing teenage white) girls.

And therefore not at the root of 1.5 million (minus 53) not abusing teenage girls.


The iimplication is that the rest of those 1.5 million would if they could.


Sorry Ake, but your view is based 100% on a racist premise.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 07:56 AM

Hang on Richard, I'm trying to agree with you here, but by saying Akenaton fails in failing, do you mean he is succeeding?

Bloody rum do if he is.

I agree that the right wing press have an agenda and to put the word Muslim in the frame is no different to pointing out at most of our in mates are Christians. After all, there is the assumption that if you are indigenous White in The UK, you must be a Christian.

It is the adding of religion to push further the point of stereotyping and hating that the press and their stooges (you, Ake) that I find disturbing. I also find the concept of gangs pushing women into prostitution appalling and hope that the fact ere is a story may well help the police push for funding to tackle it.

Just out of interest, they have a long way to go before they overtake the empire of the Albanians over here. The vast majority of massage parlours are owned by Albanians.

Of course, neither the media nor Akenaton would feel comfortable pointing that out. After all, the criminals are White, oh and generally homophobic.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 08:27 AM

Please try to be sensible Willie.
Nobody is pushing anything, I am simply repeating a very large investigation carried out by one of our leading newspapers.
It is impossible to skew anything even if I wanted to.
Of the 56 convictions,in the North of England, 50 were Pakistani Muslims.....as far as I can make out all the victims were "white" girls between the ages of 11 and 16.

"Gangs pushing women into prostitution?" you just dont get it....do you?

If these girls had been boys, you would be calling it peadophilia as you did in the Priest abuse thread.

You can all squirm as much as you like, but "facts are chiels that monae ding"

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 08:35 AM

Oh and by the way, I do know quite a lot about the Albanian crime families, and would deport the lot of them....the criminals.

But that is part of the bigger picture which also includes other minorities some of whom are also criminals who hide behind the "human rights act" to carry out their criminal activities.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 08:48 AM

No I don't mean that Willie - I mean that his failing is the failure etc...

Ake - a single set of connected events (as far as I can see a conjoint investigation) are likely to turn up connected perpetrators, so that set of events is unlikely to be statistically significant in determining the distribution of all perpetrators of similar acts.

Now IF you could establish that it was an intrinsic part of Islam to regards all non Moslems as dissolute and that that tendency was more entrenched in Islam than the equivalent in other religions, you might be starting to focus on a cause for concern - but to get to where you have gone, to advance that to say that Moslems for that reason justify the exploitation of non-Moslems involves a leap of faith without evidence. It is tending to internal contradiction if you link it with the rates of conversion of educated women to Islam.

As you know I am critical of all religions but I don't yet see a case against Islam generally or Pakistanis generally from the facts you cite. Certainly I can see much to be said in favour of Sharia law on interest and banking, but in Islam generally there is freedom of interpretation of most parts of the religion so some spread of beliefs is to be expected.

When you say on the one hand that Pakistanis are generally evil, that Muslims are generally evil, that Albanians are generally evil - er - you do tend to look like a bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Brian May
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 09:50 AM

Well using a slightly different example as pointer.

The recent political assassination in Pakistan, when the bodyguard shot his employer 27 times while the rest of the bodyguard didn't lift a finger.

It's interpreted (apparently) that in objecting to Pakistan's censorship laws, this democratically elected official was guilty of blaspheming the prophet - oh, that's handy.

The clerics appear to be applauding the act, whilst the government 'officially' abhors the crime.

Since it appears that nobody can disagree with Muslim philosophy without risking their life (either now or later e.g. Rushdie), is this the future you want for our (once great) country or any other come to that?

When will so many of you realise that your brand of liberalism is interpreted as weakness by the radicals? You run the risk of being swept away unless people like Ake et al, are allowed to 'speak the unspeakable'.

We will see . . . unfortunately.

It's interesting how much spite and vitriol is aimed at him, rather than the people actually responsible for an ever-increasing list of crimes (well that's what we call them, the clerics of course, view it differently). I never realised that 'liberals' could be so vicious.

I just wonder how many acts of absolute and extreme prejudice against non-Muslims (world-wide) will occur before you collectively start to see the light.

Don't worry, I will no doubt be subject to a barrage of righteous indignation too. 'Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn'.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: EBarnacle
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 11:01 AM

Kindly take the drifted part of the discussion to a different thread. This thread is supposed to be about censorship and bowdlerization and its effects, not about sexual crimes and the racism of the press.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 11:40 AM

"This thread is supposed to be about censorship and bowdlerization and its effects, not about sexual crimes and the racism of the press."

exactly one of the key points in my posts.


"criminals who hide behind the "human rights act" to carry out their criminal activities."


This is Fiction.


It has been shown to be fiction.


The perpetrators of these crimes were arrested and jailed and human rights Law was never involved at any stage, nor did the criminals even attempt to use it to "hide behind".


Ake knows this and it has been clarified so he can understand it.


So saying it again anyway makes it a deliberate lie.


But Akes words have had the predicted effect, because now another poster has taken the opportunity to start bashing Moslems.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 12:51 PM

Ah, I might have tried a rational think about what Akenaton was stating but try as I might, I can't so thats that.

After all, he says Albanians but he says Pakistani Muslims. So what is the religion of the Albanian slave owners and how does their religion affect this debate?

After all, if gangs from Pakistan are judged by their faith, then so should the Albanians, oh and so should every law breaker.

As the q'ran (according to an Islamic scholar I was reading of recently) goes out of it's way to forbid making money out of slavery, I fail to see how bringing the religion into it helps. After all, bad enough evil people using religion as a front for their own bigotry and ends without everybody acknowledge it.

Political correctness? Ok, let's bring it back into the debate. A colleague who is a Muslim sent me a Xmas card and we sent one back. Now, the one we sent, I couldn't remember his home address so put it in his pigeon hole at one of our offices. His manager saw me put it in and the next thing I know, I get an email from some diversity officer in our London office asking me if I went out of my way to offend Muslims.

I sent it to Tahir who kindly sent them an email asking them to get stuffed. Moral? There aint one, I am just upset that tax payers are paying for this crap and otherwise rational people feel it important to be condescending to minority employees.

Me? She forgot I am not technically employed so her threats were a good giggle too.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Brian May
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 12:51 PM

I was under the distinct impression that the 'Moslems' were actually 'bashing us'. It is their avowed intent.

However, I'm probably wrong because I'm a bit obtuse.

The fact that I used to fly worldwide carrying 'stuff' into some of the worst places in Africa et al, and from a 'focussed' military background . . . what would I know?

You have NO idea . . .

Just keep the door locked in your ivory tower - you don't seem to have made the connection - this IS still about censorship. YOU ARE BEING CONTROLLED AND MANIPULATED.

If you don't believe me - and you DON'T, read a few entries of Wikileaks - or is that a conspiracy too?

Ake - you have my sympathy, but I don't think it's actually worth the effort - unless you get something out of it of course.

Anyway, that's enough energy expended here.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 01:24 PM

Apparently for the paranoid community that needs to be constantly scared shitless abpout something in order to be happy, "The International Muslim Conspiracy" has now replaced "The International Communist Conspiracy" which in turn replaced "The International Jewish Conspiracy" which was preceeded by "The International Papist Conspiracy", etc ad nauseum........ all really childish and boring and also nothing whatever to do with this thread.

Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 04:23 PM

I am amazed.   The Catholic church was villified over homosexual assaults by criminal priests....gallons of crocodile tears were shed.
The sexual acts were routinely described as paedophelia, to disguise the true nature of the crimes.

In this case, is it simply coincidence that 95% of the criminals were Muslims abusing "white" girls?.....and police sources say this is only the tip of the iceberg.

The connection with this thread is of course "liberal ideology" which demands that we censor our literary heritage to suit the "liberal" agenda.

The police say that officers and child protection workers are afraid to speak out against the practices of these Muslim gangs lest they contravene the human rights act and are accused of racism.
The culture of silence which allows these acts to continue, is encouraged and implimented by the same people who wish to re-write our literary classics.

I is also remarkable that the same people who shed the tears for the young people abused by Catholic priests, can spare not a word of comfort for girls as young as 11 forced into a life of sexual abuse!

Call yourselves liberals?......you make me sick!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 04:37 PM

Is rape, or abuse, sexual or otherwise, worse if the victims are white, not black, brown red, or yellow. Is there an acceptance scale?

Does it really matter what group or race the "raper" is from, or whether they are from the same group, colour, sexual orientation, race or religion?

Should we be just as concerned about rape in non-western countries, such as Africa?

Just wondering?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 04:43 PM

Greg: The Jews were libelled ~~ the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" were long since exposed as a forgery.

Which doesn't mean that from 1917 until the 1980s the Marxist International was not committed to taking over the world; it was: it made no secret of the intention; but it ceased that policy under Yeltsin in 1991, as you well know, and officially abolished the USSR.

And there are elements in Islam now with the same ambition (we know because they say so); and with, they think, the means to bring it about (or did the Twin Towers just happen to blow over in a heavy wind off the Bay & those London tube trains & buses on 7/7 just derail on bits of uneven track or road & those buildings in Madrid just happen to have an earthquake?).

The well-meaning spokespersons who probably represent the Muslim majority ~~ well, maybe ~~ may inveigh against them and denounce them as atypical & unIslamic; but that won't help you if you happen to be on the next train they bomb or in the street where their next suicide bomber detonates him/herself or when the next intelligence-led pre-emptive police strike is less successful than they have been so far.

Neither childish nor boring and everything to do with this thread, mate.

Don't want to know? Get real! Whatever you PC-ly say, you know it's so.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Brian May
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 05:47 PM

In addition to the above post, how can you remonstrate with this peaceful religion whose more radical members are also intent on blowing seven shades of shit out of other Moslems? The silent majority are just that - ominously silent.

I have absolutely no argument at all with peaceful Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists - you get my drift?

I abhor social violence on the scale we're seeing it - it just happens to be coming from radical Muslims at the moment. We know it's real BECAUSE THEY PUBLICALLY STATE IT - verbally and on their placards.

What part of that are you 'liberals' not taking on board? Does it actually have to happen to you or your family before you take notice?

I equally abhor Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis and so on - it's the violence I abhor - including a lot of your vicious reactions to somebody pointing out something you don't agree with.

But I am NOT a racist because I recognise where the greatest threat is currently coming from.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 08:41 PM

""No word from you "liberals" on the younng white girls being groomed and sexually assaulted by Pakistani muslim gangs in the UK and even larger numbers in the Netherlands?""

I should have thought you would realise that this subject requires discussion on a thread on that specific topic.

Tell you what.

Why don't you give us a list of things you blame on us "liberals", along with a list of threads in which you would like to include them as off topic comments.

That way we'll be forewarned and ready to discuss apples on a thread about oranges.

That suit you?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: gnu
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 08:44 PM

Wind, wind, wind....

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 08:46 PM

Not only childish and boring (plus totally unrelated to this thread, and only marginally related to objective reality), but increasingly hysterical as well.

My, my.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Jan 11 - 11:18 PM

Where do you find this "hysteria", please, Greg?

Who, precisely, do you think is being "hysterical"?

You regard "childish and boring" as a precise and self-evidently objective critical comment, do you?

Some specific responses would be welcome [or is that a "hysterical" request?].

"My, my" right back to you, my dear fellow: and I hope it keeps fine for you.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: LadyJean
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 01:09 AM

Agatha Christie's mystery "Ten Little Niggers" was published in the United States as "Ten Little Indians", because 1) Many Americans find the word nigger offensive. 2) The nursery rhyme the title was taken from isn't known in the U.S., while every child here sang the counting song "Ten Little Indians".

The Dr. Doolittle books also used the word nigger. Some years ago, they were republished in new, nigger free, editions. It's understandable. While Lofting's books are good stories, they are not classics like "Huckleberry Finn". (My mom read Dr. Doolittle to me when I was a small child. I don't remember the word. Now I wonder if she blipped over it, or I thought it was an exotic creature like the pushmepullyou. Since, in those days, African Americans were colored.)

The first time I encountered the word. I found an article in Life magazine about segregation in the south. There was a picture of a sign headed with the word in giant letters. I thought whoever had made it must be pretty dumb if he couldn't spell a simple word like Negro.

I wouldn't believe two words I read in a British newspaper.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 02:12 AM

"the "Wizard of Oz" (the book) was a very adult, bitter, POLITICAL satire"

Only one of many otherwise long tedious boring books (that no sane child would read today) that would have sunk without a trace by the same author without the film having been made.

Oh, and then there's "The Princess Bride" - another one of many otherwise long tedious boring books (that no sane child would read today) that would have sunk without a trace by the same author without the film having been made.

(Note: insert other examples ad tedium ...)

One has to ponder whether the makers of these films (and many others like them, also based on other authors who would have otherwise sunk totally without trace today) did a good thing to keep those authors alive - well, more likely mummified - or, by making those movies, did they do something more akin to Shakespeare who took some old tales (which most of us would have never heard of today) and breathe into them some new sort of life as a new product on their own ....

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 05:13 AM

""In this case, is it simply coincidence that 95% of the criminals were Muslims abusing "white" girls?.....and police sources say this is only the tip of the iceberg.

The connection with this thread is of course "liberal ideology" which demands that we censor our literary heritage to suit the "liberal" agenda.

The police say that officers and child protection workers are afraid to speak out against the practices of these Muslim gangs lest they contravene the human rights act and are accused of racism.
The culture of silence which allows these acts to continue, is encouraged and implimented by the same people who wish to re-write our literary classics.

I is also remarkable that the same people who shed the tears for the young people abused by Catholic priests, can spare not a word of comfort for girls as young as 11 forced into a life of sexual abuse!""

Ok, as we are not to be allowed to stay on topic:-

If I thought for one second that your concern was for the plight of the girls involved I might just possibly agree with you.

However the G W Bush technique you employ in order to constantly re-inforce the idea that grooming and rape is a Muslim pastime give the lie to any such concern.

You do not make the same capital out of the activities of the many disparate groups of Eastern European sex trafficking gangs, the major difference being that they are white.

To take your main point of argument """No word from you "liberals" on the younng white girls being groomed and sexually assaulted by Pakistani muslim gangs in the UK and even larger numbers in the Netherlands?""""

1. ""No word""......Hardly surprising since the rest of us know what the topic of this thread is, and have been trying to discuss that topic.

2. Ignoring the feeble attempt to substitute "Pakistani" and "Muslim" for "Criminal" (I'm surprised you didn't go the whole hog and use the abbreviation), your take on targetting doesn't stand up to a moments scrutiny.

The true facts are as follows:- A gang of paedophile rapists, who groomed and sexually assaulted young girls, have been arrested and will stand trial for their crimes.

1. The fact that this particular gang happened to be Muslims is totally irrelevant, but it pushes the buttons of those with a racist mindset, and they ignore the fact that the majority of paedophiles in Britain are white and British.

2. The fact that the majority of the victims were white shows only that young Muslim girls are not generally allowed to wander the streets at night.

Any criminal looking to snatch a girl from the street has odds of ten to one or better of finding a white girl.

So the bottom line is that the gutter press (and I include the Times and the Telegraph in that group) and you, Ake, have distorted that straightforward set of facts to further an agenda of anti Muslim "Paki" bashing.

Bigotted both racially and religiously.

You are doing a fine job of defining yourself on this forum.

BTW, do continue to ignore those who disagree with you. It is much easier than trying to defend a seriously biased attitude.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 06:34 AM

My My.....Hasn't it gone quiet in here?

Could that be because "arch racists" Jack Straw and Keith Vaz have just been headlining BBC NEWS, demanding an inquiry into PAKISTANI MUSLIM gangs exploitation of young "white" girls in the UK.

Of course Straw and Vaz are as "liberal" as our opponents here, and wily politicians to boot.   They are simply re-positioning themselves for the coming storm which will shake the "human rights act to its core".

Back under your stones guys......hear the thunder!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 10:02 AM

==="the gutter press (and I include the Times and the Telegraph in that group)"===   Don T.

====
Well, if we are all allowed to make our own definitions, nobody can ever be defeated in argument, eh?

Assuming you are not joking then, Don T., kindly define "gutter press" to justify that particularly fatuous statement. Unless, as appears, it simply means "any newspaper with which I, the great and infallible Don T., happen to disagree" ~~ in which case, please don't bother.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 10:15 AM

Just wonder what you folks historically called Brazil nuts? Did it have the "N " word in it. It did where I grew up (""n" toes). Should that name not be reinstated, for historic purposes? Then we can change the name of Brazil, which is named after the nut. :))

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 11:01 AM

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.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 11:48 AM

You mean, I take it then, Greg & Richard, like The Guardian also; or does the fact that that journal's sensationalism happen to reflect what I take to be your own take on political matters somehow exempt it from being deposited into your particular roadside drainage channel?

It has, after all, belatedly got around to this story as its lead in today's online edition. Here is its opening:

···White girls seen as 'easy meat' by Pakistani rapists, says Jack Straw
Row erupts after former home secretary says grooming for sexual abuse is a problem among some Pakistani men···

Doesn't look all that different in its headlining from all the other coverage to me.

All newspapers sensationalise to some extent, for crying out loud. It's how they sell. Show me one which doesn't {except perhaps the FT?} and I will give you a nice red apple.

❦~Michael~❦

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 01:39 PM

Thunder?

Ha ha ha ha!


Fuck off!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 02:46 PM

For the first time in 10 years it seems even a adim is too correct to allow conversation on attacks upon COngressmen.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 02:56 PM

I retract my last statement.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 04:08 PM

You didn't read what I said did you MtheGM?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 04:09 PM

and the walls came tumbling down!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: josepp
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 04:16 PM

Never mind the racism issue, it's a smokescreen. The danger is that once we allow certain words to be changed, we can change entire sentences and then entire paragraphs and then entire chapters. Pretty soon,we can replace the entire text of a book with another or with whatever we wish to and then where are we?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 04:37 PM

I think the epithet you're searching for Richard, is "lip service"

Neither Straw nor Vas, have any intention of putting the human rights act in order, their words are cynical and self serving.

No matter, they have cut the "racist bawling" idiots off at the knee, and sent them back where they belong.

I was interested in your last two posts but you have perhaps unintentionally lapsed into legal jargon, which is difficult for a simple man like me to follow.

Maybe you could explain your position again in more simple terms?
and I'm NOT takin' the piss.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 06:42 PM

""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.""

Thank you for that Richard.

It has long been my opinion that truth in newspapers has become a twentieth, and latterly twenty first, century oxymoron.

I don't any longer purchase these rags, preferring to get my news from the BBC which, in spite of the leftward leanings of many of its personnnel, is constrained to stick fairly closely to the (albeit sometimes slanted) truth by the fact that most events involve live coverage, and eye witness testimony.

I believe that anybody who talks to the sad excuse for journalists who make up, or distort, the content of the British Press is a fool.

Far better to refuse comment, as you can then call them fucking liars when they make up a story about you, without risking a libel suit.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 08 Jan 11 - 11:43 PM

There's no need to argue this case as once again Ake has got it spectacularly wrong.

Vaz has spoken out 'against' Straws views, describing them as "dangerous".

Not that any of ths has any connection with Ake's dreams of "thunder" and "walls coming down".

More hot air from FW.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Jan 11 - 12:30 AM

===You didn't read what I said did you MtheGM? ===

Yes I did, Richard. Could you please specify where you think I have misrepresented what you said about the "gutter press", which was the only part of your previous post to which I was responding?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Jan 11 - 04:53 AM

What idiotic arguments these people advance!

"There are more white sex offenders in prison than muslim sex
offenders, so the this rape and exploitation of exclusively non-muslim girls by gangs of almost exclusively muslim men, cannot be "cultural"

Do you people even make any attempt to interpret statements like that.

"liberals" will excuse anything to protect their sacred agenda...even to allow thousands of homosexuals to face death and disease rather than target their behaviour and lifestyle.

When I raised the subject of tinker families in Scotland, who were using their special status to deal drugs, indulge in illegal money lending enforced by stabbings and physical violence, I was villified as a "racist". The Council were forced tp pretend that the village(fortress) where they lived was being closed for renovation. It has never reopened.
The families have been rehoused, where police have access and their actions are visible, but why should the authorities be afraid of criminals?

Looks like they are heading down the same path with these young girls, "lets just put our heads in the sand and pretend nothing is happening"

Had Straw not had the guts to speak out(for whatever reason), I and others here would still be the subject of vile abuse.
Only Richard has attempted to forward any reasonable explanation and it is couched in terms that I find difficult to understand.

Vaz is a creep and manipulator of the worst kind, a favourite of Tony Blair.....we can expect his stance to "evolve" depending on the direction of the political wind.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 09 Jan 11 - 06:48 AM

""liberals" will excuse anything to protect their sacred agenda"


Ake - YOU brought this up.

You started this drift with a double insinuation about 1. "liberals" and 2. Islam.

The question of "liberals" is YOUR agenda.


"Vaz is a creep and manipulator of the worst kind"

Again, YOU brought him into this conversation.


As for "special status" - this only exists in your imagination.

The human rights act WAS NEVER USED.

The guys who were caught GOT CONVICTED.

If there are others caught, THEY WILL ALSO BE CONVICTED.


Because they AREN'T PROTECTED.


This talk of protection is UNFOUNDED.


It is shit stirring bigotted BULLSHIT.



Thunder? The best you can manage is persistent drizzle.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 05:58 AM

It seems that politcal correctness is overlooked at Christmas. Films like 'On the Buses' 'Rising Damp' the 'Carry-ons and many more comedys that was ok to show in the 70s are still regularly shown when sexist and racial predudice was 'the norm' I assume that people now see it for what it was and laugh at the ignorance of it rather than the humour content. But as with a classic book it would be impossible to cut everything out. All you can do is explain that society was different then or choose not to watch.

As for gutter press I don't read any of the sensationalist papers newspapers anymore. Regarding the murder suspect landlord of Jo Yeates they had published his name and invaded his personal life without any shred of evidence that he had done anything just because he was at hand. I always thought that a person's identity could not be published until charged. If that man is innocent his name now is going to be blackened whether innocent or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 06:14 AM

The view of a Pakistani reporter for the "Independent" echos my own.

Yasmin alibhai Brown

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 06:21 AM

Leading Articles Commentators
Yasmin Alibhai-BrownTerence BlackerSimon CarrRupert CornwellSloane CrosleyMary DejevskyRobert FiskAndrew GriceAdrian HamiltonJohann HariPhilip HensherHoward JacobsonDominic LawsonJohn LichfieldHamish McRaeMatthew NormanChristina PattersonJohn RentoulSteve RichardsSarah SandsMary Ann SieghartJoan SmithMark SteelJanet Street-PorterAndreas Whittam SmithColumnists
Julie BurchillRichard IngramsAlex JamesDom JolyDylan JonesDavid ListerThomas SutcliffeBrian VinerJohn WalshJanet Street-PorterLetters myIndependent Environment
Climate Change Green Living Nature Nature StudiesUK butterfliesmyIndependent Sport
Video Athletics Cricket Live ScoresFootball InternationalNews & CommentPremier LeagueFootball LeagueEuropeanScottishFA & League CupsTransfersLive ScoresGolf Motor Racing Olympics Racing Rugby League Rugby Union News & CommentInternationalClub RugbySailing Tennis Others Life & Style
Fashion NewsFeaturesFood & Drink NewsReviewsFeaturesRecipesHealth & Families Health NewsFeaturesHealthy LivingHealth A-ZHealth AdviceHouse & Home InteriorsGardeningPropertyPetsProperty SearchTradesmen SearchHistory Gadgets & Tech NewsGamingFeaturesMotoring Motoring NewsFeaturesRoad TestsCommentUsed Car SearchNew Car SearchDating Member ProfilesPuzzles & Games Most Popular GamesCrosswordsQuizzesAction GamesSports GamesShooting GamesPuzzlesArts & Ents
Video Art NewsFeaturesReviewsGreat WorksArt Information ServiceArchitecture Music NewsFeaturesReviewsMusic MagazineClassical NewsFeaturesReviewsFilms NewsFeaturesReviewsTV & Radio NewsFeaturesReviewsTheatre & Dance NewsFeaturesReviewsComedy NewsFeaturesReviewsBooks NewsFeaturesReviewsPuzzles Most Popular GamesCrosswordsQuizzesAction GamesSports GamesShooting GamesPuzzlesArts & Ents Wall Travel
News Travel Wall48 Hours In Africa Americas Asia Australasia & Pacific Europe Middle East UK Hotels Skiing SnoveoSound & Vision Travel Shop Money
Spend & Save Loans & Credit Mortgages Pensions Insurance Tax Pensions & Investment Centre Independent Compare myIndependent IndyBest
Fashion & Beauty Gadgets & Tech House & Garden Food & Drink Outdoor & Activity Arts & Books Travel Green myIndependent Blogs Student
News Career Planning ApprenticeshipsVocational StudyGetting a JobGraduate JobsGetting Into University A-Z DegreesA-Z Unis & Colleges ApplyingClearingOverseasStudent Life HealthAccommodationFinancesMusic & FilmFashionTechnology & GamingPostgraduate Postgraduate StudyMBAs GuideA-Z Business SchoolsBusiness school searchCompetitions Ezines myIndependent Shopping from The Independent & The Independent on Sunday
Home > Opinion > Commentators > Yasmin Alibhai-Brown

Yasmin Alibhai Brown: Jack Straw is right to ask hard questions about Asian men

Fear of racism should no longer be the veil covering up hard truths


Monday, 10 January 2011
Share
Close
Diggdel.icio.usFacebookRedditGoogleStumble UponFarkNewsvineYahooBuzzBeboTwitterIndependent MindsPrintEmailText Size
NormalLargeExtra LargeSponsored Links
Ads by Google

Spread Betting - Try Now
Try GFTs Award-Winning TradingPlatform. Free Practice Account.
www.GFTuk.com

Glasgow Coupons
1 ridiculously huge coupon a day.It's like doing Glasgow at 90% Off!
www.GROUPON.co.uk/Glasgow

Msc Physics EuroMasters
Choose from 6 different UKuniversities. Find out more.
SEPnet.ac.uk/EuroMasters

New Year, New Job?
Take a Part-Time Electrical coursefind new Job opportunities in 2011
Train4TradeSkills.com/Electrician



The unrepentant British Pakistani gang leaders who violated young girls in Derby have been rightly reviled and given indefinite sentences. Their victims were almost all white. There it might have ended but for Jack Straw, who rekindled passions on all sides when he said that such Pakistani men thought these females were easy meat who deserved no respect or consideration ( I paraphrase). No solid evidence is provided by Straw to back these assertions. In fact, when he was Home Secretary he could have funded research on the matter, but failed to.


Still, even a man used to controversies must be nonplussed by the reaction to his comments. His words were thrown on to blazing pyres by fulminating leftie liberals, feminists, Muslims, Pakistanis, anti-racists and influential individuals who think of themselves as gravely responsible. It was unacceptable, they said, to racialise or ethnicise a particular crime; some even declared that any discussion of cultural factors was dangerous and racist.

Related articles
•More Comment articles
Search the news archive for more stories
Being avowedly a leftie liberal, anti-racist, feminist, Muslim, part-Pakistani, and yes, a very responsible person, I should be in the circle with these objectors – particularly as I can't stand the Rt Hon MP for Blackburn, his devious, shady politicking and moral expediency. However, just as when he criticised the full veil, I cannot condemn his views. How can I? Just before Christmas, I too wrote about these rapists and the anti-white cultural prejudices in some of their communities and families. It was a hard column to write, as is this one. Easier to pick your way barefoot through a dark park littered with broken glass. You need to think about every line, its effect, and know that you will step on the shard that will cut you, however carefully you tread.

I accept that on the basis of the evidence presented in court, this Derby gang was no different from that of the white grooming posse convicted in Cornwall in November. They too preyed on helpless, easily-pleased young white girls who were then used and destroyed. Most paedophiles in this country are white, and their victims too. Just because they harm their own doesn't make it less abominable or more acceptable. What does it matter to a young, white, rape victim whether her violator has pasty or dark skin? And it is gratifying that reputable figures like Barnado's Martin Narey and the judge in the Derby case have spoken out against wholesale racial scapegoating. We know extremists use race and crime statistics to stoke racial hatred against Britons of colour and from religious minorities. I have sometimes been a pin-up girl for the repellent BNP and English Defence League, whenever I criticise Muslims, or Asian values or black Britons who do wrong. You feel degraded and treacherous when this happens.

But I still say we need to expose and discuss more openly the underpinning values of the Asian criminal rings in many of our cities. If we don't, the evil will grow. Fear of racism should no longer be the veil covering up hard truths. What the Derby gang did has planted and raised more racism – possibly even among good, benign people – than my words ever could. I am sure recruitment to extremist parties has gone up too. Prominent anti-racists know that, but will not openly say so.

The criminals feel they did no wrong. These girls to them are trash, asking to be wasted – unlike their own women, who must be kept from the disorderly world out there. The whore and the virgin are both feared and severely controlled and abused. A 2005 study in the Netherlands of Muslim males found the same bifurcation, and identified deep sexism as responsible for both.

The conversations can be heard every day around dining tables and on streets; they are embedded in thought and language. I once interviewed the mother of a man who had been convicted of repeatedly raping his young wife, who came from a rural village in Pakistan. The head of the nursery school the couple's child attended had helped the victim report what was happening. In Urdu, the mother hissed: "How lucky was she to get my son? The dirty, ungrateful bitch – went to a white woman to complain. They sleep with everybody. She just didn't know how to make him happy. We have thrown her out. She can go on the streets like those whites now."

I have been writing about these culturally- sanctioned injustices for two decades, and have interviewed countless people. I will not melt the misdemeanours into generalities, and do not accept that ethnicity and sexual abuse cannot and should not ever be linked.

Some years back, a similar furore was raised over the Sierra Leonean journalist Sorious Samura, who made a TV documentary on the gang rape of young girls in British cities. Censured by the usual slate of apologists, he accepted that the attacks were carried out by men of all backgrounds, but pointed out that a high proportion were black or mixed-race. "As a black man as well as a journalist, I wanted to know what lay behind such attacks, the profoundly disturbing attitudes to females."

That is what I am seeking to do too, as a Muslim journalist who cares deeply about migrants and their progress. Let's ask questions we never ask, to find out more than we ever try to. Do these men have any idea of normal, pleasurable, healthy sex between a man and a woman? Are they maddened by their own frustration and fear of females? I am not impugning those Asian or Pakistani men who love women, but those who are too messed up to understand what that means; maybe those whose key choices, including their lifelong partners, have all been made by families operating as firms. And again, is this the most appalling pay-back for white racism? Black writers in the US, including Eldridge Cleaver, have written movingly about some of the unconscious, vengeful urges that impel black men to take up with white partners to assert power, sometimes to annihilate the person who trusts them.

Shouting down Jack Straw, busying ourselves with warnings about feeding the BNP, are displacement activities that will do nothing to stop Asian groomers, who, from childhood have developed distorted ideas about themselves, society, females, vice and virtue. Like Samura said, it is up to insiders to examine and reveal what lies beneath these crimes. We owe that to ourselves, to our future generations, and to the country we have made ours.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Donuel
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 07:35 AM

Blaming Palin for the mass murders is ridiculous.

Gabby Gifford's Republican opponent in the recent election used to hold events where you could fire an actual M16 in celebration of getting rid of Gabby.

I'd say Mr Kelly's failed campaign is more culpable than Sarah Palin.

WHen Sarah Palin said reload, she meant virtual ammo, not real bullets. Political correctness made Palin erase her hit list webpage.

Some things are only partially true. However sometimes you can make a lie become a truth just like Saddam attacking the US with WMDs.
After awhile even a president's retraction won't remove the perception in the minds of people who are emotionally programed.
Obama is a muslim and was born in Africa who wants death panels still polls in the high 30%.

If FOX news repeats that the mass killer was a pot smoking lefty liberal 20,000 times in the next 3 months it will become a truism forever.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 02:47 PM

Ake posted the following quotes:

"Monday, 10 January 2011
Share
Close
Diggdel.icio.usFacebookRedditGoogleStumble UponFarkNewsvineYahooBuzzBeboTwitterIndependent MindsPrintEmailText Size
NormalLargeExtra LargeSponsored Links
Ads by Google

Spread Betting - Try Now
Try GFTs Award-Winning TradingPlatform. Free Practice Account.
www.GFTuk.com

Glasgow Coupons
1 ridiculously huge coupon a day.It's like doing Glasgow at 90% Off!
www.GROUPON.co.uk/Glasgow

Msc Physics EuroMasters
Choose from 6 different UKuniversities. Find out more.
SEPnet.ac.uk/EuroMasters

New Year, New Job?
Take a Part-Time Electrical coursefind new Job opportunities in 2011
Train4TradeSkills.com/Electrician"


Nice to know he takes the time to read and understand his cut and pastes, and that he ensures that only the most relevant points are posted in a way that decipherably backs up his argument.


Perhaps next time he could post the Shipping Forecast - it would make his contribution significantly more interesting and valuable.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 02:59 PM

And all this bullshit relates to Sam Clemens and Huck Finn how, exactly?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 03:10 PM

When will "liberal" stop sticking up for, and protecting "white" people.

I'm not racist and have nothing against white people, but it can't be ignored that time and time again it is white men and women, driven by their "western" ideology that leads them to abuse children, beat people up at football matches, and smash up shops at edl rallies etc.

White people are all closet paedophiles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sick of all these "moderates" who come out with all their "these criminals aren't representative" claptrap.

Just go to Thailand and ask anyone - white men are perverts and kiddy fiddlers just waiting for the opportunity.

The History of Britain, Germany, Russia, France etc etc is littered with perverted murderers and rapists and its time we faced up to the harsh realities and took away their "protected status" in the courts (everyone knows that white people are more likely to get off than the rest of us)

It's clearly something that sets white people apart that they feel they are somehow entitled to do this kind of sick stuff.

They think they are superior, they are violent, greedy, wasteful and most of all perverted and this shows in the so called "spam" that they receive in their e.mails ... yeah yeah ... pull the other one!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 03:13 PM

PS - for those of you that need guidance on such matters, that last post was s-a-t-i-r-i-c-a-l.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 03:16 PM

Sorry about that, the link didn't work and the cut and past was preceeded by information notes(dont know why)

But fear not I will explain.

Open post.....place finger on DOWN button.....KEEP finger on button till start of article....Remove finger....and stick it right up your arse!

Are you comfortable with that? Do you need further directions?

Your ARSE is easy to find, its where the words that you post come from!

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 03:22 PM

This OP-ED PIECE has some of the best arguments against this that I have read. As a writer, I was particularly taken with the following:

Authors' original texts should be sacrosanct intellectual property, whether a book is a classic or not. Tampering with a writer's words underscores both editors' extraordinary hubris and a cavalier attitude embraced by more and more people in this day of mash-ups, sampling and digital books — the attitude that all texts are fungible, that readers are entitled to alter as they please, that the very idea of authorship is old-fashioned.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 10 Jan 11 - 03:31 PM

Ake,

Your last post made me laugh out loud - AT YOU!

Bwaahahaha.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: EBarnacle
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:35 AM

Good link, Kat. I was also interested in the sub link to the "Bellringer of Notre Dame." Thanks for bringing the tread back on topic.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: DMcG
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 10:55 AM

Just yesterday I had occasion to read Charlotte Bronte's editorial comments on her sister's   "Wuthering Heights". It is all worth reading but especially this:


A large class of readers, likewise, will suffer greatly from the introduction into the pages of this work of words printed with all their letters, which it has become the custom to represent by the initial and final letter only - a blank line filling the interval. I may as well say at once that, for this circumstance, it is out of my power to apologise; deeming it, myself, a rational plan to write words at full length. The practice of hinting by single letters those expletives with which profane and violent persons are wont to garnish their discourse, strikes me as a proceeding which, however well meant, is weak and futile. I cannot tell what good it does - what feeling it spares - what horror it conceals.

Bowdlerisation at its best is equivalent to this, and at less than its best severely damages the book, article or whatever.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: PHJim
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 02:21 PM

Many children today, while familiar with the N word, do not have any idea of its meaning nor its historical signifigance. I taught school for many years and recall confronting some children on the playground who were calling each other the N word and asking them why they would use that word. They explained that they had learned the word from TV and rap records and they honestly thought it meant "Buddy" or "Brother", since it was used in this way by comedians and rap artists. They were shocked when I told them that I'd rather hear the F word than the N word.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 07:26 PM

""There are more white sex offenders in prison than muslim sex
offenders, so the this rape and exploitation of exclusively non-muslim girls by gangs of almost exclusively muslim men, cannot be "cultural"""

That is a very interesting distortion of what I said, changing, by omission, the whole direction of my statement.

Who said it couldn't be cultural? My opinion was, and is, that one could not extrapolate from the actions of a small group of Muslims, that there is a predilection toward paedophile rape of young white girls in the Muslim community as a whole, especially when this gang were unlikely to run across many other than white girls in the streets.   

Methinks someone is getting reallydesperate in his search for something remotely logical to bolster his ridiculous argument>

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 08:24 PM

Methinks someone REALLY fails to understand the topic of this thread.

Take the Muslim-bashing elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 11 Jan 11 - 09:00 PM

I believe this is on topic?

Can I make my opoint more clearly?

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 03:14 AM

Greg, Barnicle et all.

The censorship of literature is not a subject for "debate", who do we debate with?

As far as I can see, no one even on this "liberal" hotbed, supports the censorship of classic literature. It is a crime against our culture.
How can we have debate if no one is putting forward an alternative view?

The thread simply widened to encompass other issues like freedom of speech, for example, the effect of the human rights act in repressing proper investigation of crimes committed by minority groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 05:33 AM

"the effect of the human rights act in repressing proper investigation of crimes committed by minority groups"

Saying it again won't make it true.

The guys who were caught were tried annd convicted and the human rights act had NOTHING to d with it.

You keep telling the lie and I'll keep jumping on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Brian May
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 07:37 AM

Blimey, is this still going on?

Amazes me how much stamina the do-gooders have.

I'm sure all the radical Islamists will be VERY encouraged.

When are you all converting then . . . ?

WARNING:

Incoming . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 09:55 AM

A little article by Ake and Brians most dependable ally on these issues (the Mail) on how Black and Asian people are the demographic most likely to be harrassed by the police under stop and search laws.

In addition, according to the stats, the police are more likely to charge you if you are Black or Asian and more likely to let you off with a warning if you are White.

Daily Mail

I suspect "Tinkers" are also more likely to be stopped.

hmmm .... no evidence of Akes claims there ...

He must be talking bollocks as usual.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 04:40 PM

""The thread simply widened to encompass other issues like freedom of speech, for example, the effect of the human rights act in repressing proper investigation of crimes committed by minority groups.""

The thread didn't simply widen. You widened it to encompass one of your favourite hobby horses, namely the denigration of any minority group you happen to dislike by your usual inane admixture of innuendo and exaggeration.

I think I'll just leave the bigot's coven to mumble amongst themselves since this thread topic has been buried.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 05:07 PM

Don't forget Brian & the paranoids coven, too, Don.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 05:29 PM

Posted again, without further comment.

A senior West Mercia police officer has told the Times, that those convicted represent only a small proportion of what is described as "a tidal wave" of offending, which has been uncovered in the North of England.

Other Police sources have called for an end to the damaging taboo surrounding gang led on street grooming, which they blame on the fear by police and child protection workers, of being branded "racist"
"To stop this sort of crime,you need to start talking about it, but everyone has been too scared to expose the ethnicity factor.
No one wants to stand up and say that in some parts of the country, Pakistanis are recruiting young white girls and passing them round their relatives for sex, but we need to stop worrying about the racial complication"

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 05:58 PM

Thanks Ake,

Nothing in there about anyone being protected by the human rights act.

No change.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Jan 11 - 07:04 PM

And of course the Times would have no reason at all for sensationalising, exaggerating, or even inventing stories.

Muslims account for just 2.97% of the population according to the latest census figures available.

It is reasonable to assume approximately half are female, so about 1.485% are male, of which 40.22% are between the ages of 16 and 45.

How many of the resulting 415,800 are happily married upright citizens is an unknown, but it is reasonable to assume that it would be the vast majority.

Reported rapes in the UK in 2008 and 2009 were 12637 and 13093 respectively. No figures were given for convictions in 2008/2009 but there were 800 convictions in 2006.

Since the statistics also show that only 26% were committed by strangers, we are left with 3285 and 3404 reported which involved strangers.

Taking the demographics into account, Muslim men might be expected to be responsible for 1.485% of those. That is to say 49 in 2008 and 51 in 2009 over the whole of the UK.

Unless figures much larger than that can be produced and verified, the proportion of rapists in the Muslim community would seem to be much the same as that of the non Muslim community.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Lox
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 05:10 AM

I wonder if the "police sources" referred to are the same police employees who disproportionately harass Blacks and Asians and who are twice as likely to let a white suspect off with a warning.

Thats the thing about reporting a persons Opinion rather than fact.

But Ake isn't able to differentiate between those things.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Brian May
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 07:37 AM

Don't forget me . . . I can't either ;o)

Do you have a lift or is it still stairs in the average ivory tower?

I just wondered if they've changed over the years.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Brian May
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 07:40 AM

Thinking about it, I only hope it's 'old ivory' because if it isn't that's another mine field that's about to be disturbed.

And mines are definitely non PC, which returns us nicely to the subject thread.

I do love symmetry.

Have fun all, it's still a great world.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: Ed T
Date: 13 Jan 11 - 09:01 AM

""The censorship of literature is not a subject for "debate", who do we debate with?""

The discussion was going along fairly well, until the topic was changed (some may call it hijacked).

When the discussion ends on the posted topic that's it, at least for that point in time, as people frequently bring them back.

An idea, when another topic is wished to be discussed why just open another thread? It would seem respectful to the person who opened the original thread, and those participating "on the thread topic". Also, that way the correct title is indexed for the future.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: MorwenEdhelwen1
Date: 28 May 13 - 09:18 PM

@Hawk: There is still racism in Cuba. My friend Marcia's White. She was born in Holguin and is a year older than me, and says that a lot of White people in Holguin still make racist remarks about Blacks.

Subject: RE: BS: Political Correctness goes too far
From: gnu
Date: 28 May 13 - 10:47 PM

4.5 months and thread drift? I'm gone fer now.