|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: Control of racism, how far is too far?
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
News article
8 Police men, off duty and away from work were involved in an undisclosed way with the telling of a racist joke. Their constabulary is now under investigation by an independent enquiry.
Now I detest racism and don't seek to defend it, but isn't calling an enquiry going just way too far? After all, the guys were off duty at the time.
My company has a policy against sexism. Sometimes I tell my wife a sexist joke because it is funny. Should my company be litigated against?
Seems a bit mad to me, but then I am a white man, maybe I can't understand.
[ 27. January 2004, 14:28: Message edited by: Nightlamp ]
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
'Justus'
Shipmate
# 2424
|
Posted
I think this inquiry has to be seen in the context of the extreme scrutiny under which the police have been placed since the BBC investigation into racism in the Greater Manchester Police force - click here for further details.
In the past two days news has also emerged regarding individuals in the West Midlands Police who are also members of the British National Party (BNP) here for further details.
Both of the recent stories referred to follow the labeling of the Metropolitan Police as "institutionally racist" following the Lawrence Inquiry.
I think the investigation in Kent is taking things too far, however the historic attitudes of many police officers combined with the context of recent events naturally leads people to ask: how racist are the police ?
When I get stopped by a police officer I want to know its becuase I've done something wrong not becuase I'm not white. When an officer refuses to exercise their discretion for me but does so for someone who is white (an example cited by one of the racist officers in the BBC film) I want to know if the reason for that choice is down to the colour of my skin.
Part of the problem is that like the BNP, those who want to promote a racist agenda are smart enough to figure you don't do it by calling someone a nigger of a paki to their face. Rather the racism is exercised in a more subtle fashion through the exercise of powers and duties in a manner which hits non-white people hardest (or 'black added tax' as one of the officers in the BBC film called it).
Given this difficulty the question becomes how do you tackle the racist who is subtle enough to practice their racism in a manner which is not immediately apparent without embarking on a McCarthyite witch-hunt ?
I think Kent has got this one wrong, but if the purpose was to demonstrate that racism won't be tolerated then they've got the right idea.
Posts: 295 | From: York | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
Persecution of people because of words they use, jokes they tell, or how they think violates ones personal freedom. Especially when the persecution only applies to one race. If several off duty black officers were heard making racial slurs or telling racial jokes about white people, this would not be an issue.
In my mind, the prosecution of someone for "racial" crimes should involve some type of action or attempted action that infringes upon one's right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. For example, if the officers in question had spent the evening beating a black man because of his skin color, or generally harrassing a group of racially different people, I would say there is something that needs to be done legally. However, simply telling a joke or making a questionable comment in the privacy of one's home or amongst friends is hardly call for a full investigation. People do it all the time, everyone does. They may not tell sambo jokes, but every group of individuals has another group they persistantly make fun of. Should we investigate everyone?
Granted the officers in question were not extremely wise in saying whatever they said where someone could overhear them, but their actions are hardly criminal. My personal belief is that launching an "inquiry" is going a bit far.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lurker McLurker™
Ship's stowaway
# 1384
|
Posted
The article says a member of the public reported the men to their superiors. How did this person know they were police? If they were wearing their uniforms at the time, then their behaviour is a disciplinary matter.
--------------------
Just War Theory- a perversion of morality?
Posts: 5661 | From: Raxacoricofallapatorius | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nonpropheteer:
Persecution of people because of words they use, jokes they tell, or how they think violates ones personal freedom.
So we shouldn't discriminate against racists when recruiting police officers?
quote:
Especially when the persecution only applies to one race. If several off duty black officers were heard making racial slurs or telling racial jokes about white people, this would not be an issue.
Says you. On the basis of no evidence whatsoever.
quote:
In my mind, the prosecution of someone for "racial" crimes should involve some type of action or attempted action that infringes upon one's right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
Racism in the police force undermines the confidence of ethnic minorities in the policing of the country. This can only have negative effects on "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".
quote:
For example, if the officers in question had spent the evening beating a black man because of his skin color, or generally harrassing a group of racially different people, I would say there is something that needs to be done legally.
But if they just have a complete disregard for the human dignity of a group who depends upon them for security, that is absolutely fine? Would it not be better to weed out the officers whose attitudes make them likely to end up abusing people racially, especially given that such attitudes must inhibit their ability to properly do their job even if not manifested in such actions?
quote:
However, simply telling a joke or making a questionable comment in the privacy of one's home or amongst friends is hardly call for a full investigation. People do it all the time, everyone does. They may not tell sambo jokes, but every group of individuals has another group they persistantly make fun of.
Speak for yourself.
quote:
Should we investigate everyone?
When those people are entrusted with the safety of others, it is prudent to ensure they do not in fact harbour attitudes that will hinder their ability to do the job properly. If racist attitudes underlie the racist joking, then we need to know about it.
quote:
Granted the officers in question were not extremely wise in saying whatever they said where someone could overhear them, but their actions are hardly criminal. My personal belief is that launching an "inquiry" is going a bit far.
NP
Because of course their right to harbour racist attitudes is more important than the right of the public - all members of it - to have a police force that actually has their best interests at heart? Doesn't the police force, as an employer, have the right to ensure its members have the appropriate aptitude for the job? Racism is prima facie evidence one cannot effectively police a multi-cultural country.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
I know Karl has already taken this apart, but I though I could do it more eloquently:
quote:
Persecution of people because of words they use, jokes they tell, or how they think violates ones personal freedom.
Bollocks
quote:
If several off duty black officers were heard making racial slurs or telling racial jokes about white people, this would not be an issue.
Bollocks
quote:
For example, if the officers in question had spent the evening beating a black man because of his skin color, or generally harrassing a group of racially different people, I would say there is something that needs to be done legally. However, simply telling a joke or making a questionable comment in the privacy of one's home or amongst friends is hardly call for a full investigation.
Bollocks
quote:
People do it all the time, everyone does.
Bollocks
quote:
They may not tell sambo jokes, but every group of individuals has another group they persistantly make fun of.
Bollocks
Don't make excuses for racism because 'everyone does it'. I don't. My friends don't. My family members don't. Nobody I know is openly racist, not against black people, white people, Irish people...not against anyone. Maybe I am lucky in the company I keep, but to say 'everyone does it' is a gross and offensive generalisation.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
How can anyone control racism? You may be able to control the expression thereof, but if you think that by making the use of racial slurs illegal you're actually controlling racism, I want to live in your world. It must be lovely there, full of pink fluffy unicorns and enchanted teapots.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
Absolutely. You can't control racism, but you can control the expression of racism which is better than nothing.
And keep your hands of our enchanted teapots. The unicorns you can have.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Porter-Miller
Tiocfaidh Separabit
# 1459
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
It must be lovely there, full of pink fluffy unicorns and enchanted teapots.
Erin
Unicorns are white and golden - not pink and fluffy - come on, get a grip!
--------------------
It's a beautiful day - don't let it get away - Bono and the boys
Let's all "Release Some Tension"
Posts: 1231 | From: Washington, D.C. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
J Whitgift
Pro ecclesia dei!
# 1981
|
Posted
I am with Karl and IntellectByProxy on this one. And you have to admit that IntellectByProxy did provide a good precis of Karl's argument, very eloquent indeed, almost an example of nice cop - nasty - cop ![[Biased]](wink.gif) .
Lux
--------------------
On the issue of homosexuality the Liberals have spent their time thinking, considering and listening (in the spirit of the Windsor process), whereas Conservative Anglicans have used the time to further dig their feet in and become more intransigent.
Posts: 2838 | From: Gone shoreside | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Miller:
Unicorns are white and golden - not pink and fluffy - come on, get a grip!
These are the special unicorns who exist in a world where outlawing something makes all inclinations go away.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Riv
Shipmate
# 3553
|
Posted
Either that, or there really is something enchanting in those teapots.
--------------------
"I don't know whether I like it, but it's what I meant." Ralph Vaughan Williams
"Riv, you've done a much better job communicating your passion than your point. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about." Tom Clune
Posts: 2749 | From: Too far South, USA. I really want to move. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Erin, love, we're not talking about outlawing racist slurs. We're talking about whether people who make them should be police officers.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Don't try to confuse me with your commie facts, you fiendish pinko!
But if they told a joke while they were off-duty? Geez, the employer now has control over the jokes you tell when you're not at work? That's frickin' frightening. I do wonder, though, what it the reactions would be if the employer were the evil Nestle. I think you guys would implode trying to figure out who was the bad guy. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012
|
Posted
Oh look, another thread which basically splits down UK/USA lines. Do the Australians not give a damn about these kind of issues? Or are they just too quiet to be heard?
Anyway, it might be a good idea to remember this, before getting really annoyed because all these shipmates, who happen to be from the other side of the pond to you, disagree with you.
Sarkycow, thoughtful hellhost
--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”
Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cranmer's baggage*
Shipmate
# 4937
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sarkycow:
Oh look, another thread which basically splits down UK/USA lines. Do the Australians not give a damn about these kind of issues? Or are they just too quiet to be heard?
This Australian has discovered (My, some of us are bright, aren't we!!!!) that once people start hurling stones across the pond there's no point trying to get a word in. And this is Hell, isn't it? So what's the point in trying to make a sensible comment anyway?
That said, I don't think there's a place for racist, sexist or other discriminatory jokes anywhere, for off-duty police or anyone else. We may want to pretend otherwise, but the stuff we joke about still shapes our thinking.
Before Erin starts snapping at me: I know we're not going to create a fluffy-bunny utopia. But I also believe that we can reduce the amount of mental pollution we each have to wade through, and that doing so will be good for us and for other people.
However, holding an enquiry into seems to be a case of using a steam-roller to crack a nut. There may be more out-and-out stupid ways to waste taxpayers money, but I can't think of them right now.
--------------------
Eschew obfuscation!
Posts: 729 | From: the antipodes | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ce
Shipmate
# 1957
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
Erin, love, we're not talking about outlawing racist slurs. We're talking about whether people who make them should be police officers.
Or more precisely whether:
1. Police officers who are stupid enough to make racist remarks in public a couple of weeks after the North West police training thing made all the national headlines BBC URL might not be fit to be public servants in positions of authority.
2. Again, in the light of what emerged in Manchester, to enquire whether somene who is prepared/stupid enough to act in such a manner in public might just be importing those attitudes into their work in a manner which constitutes a gross disciplinary offence.
Incidentally, someone asked about educational standards for police recruits - there are none: recruiting standards
ce
--------------------
ce
Posts: 376 | From: Middlesex, U.K. | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cranmer's baggage*
Shipmate
# 4937
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ce:
Incidentally, someone asked about educational standards for police recruits - there are none: recruiting standards
In days of old, when I used to teach in what might kindly be called the arse-end of the education system, we reckoned that most of our students went into law-related occupations: the smart ones became crims, and the really thick ones joined the police force! I know some highly educated police, but every now and then I meet one who makes me think that the old days aren't so long ago....
--------------------
Eschew obfuscation!
Posts: 729 | From: the antipodes | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
Don't try to confuse me with your commie facts, you fiendish pinko!
Ack! Quick, comrades, the secret plan's been rumbled!
quote:
But if they told a joke while they were off-duty? Geez, the employer now has control over the jokes you tell when you're not at work? That's frickin' frightening. I do wonder, though, what it the reactions would be if the employer were the evil Nestle. I think you guys would implode trying to figure out who was the bad guy.
You mean like telling Daily Mail readers that asylum seekers are natural predators of paedophiles?
[ 04. November 2003, 12:39: Message edited by: Karl - Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ce
Shipmate
# 1957
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
But if they told a joke while they were off-duty? Geez, the employer now has control over the jokes you tell when you're not at work? That's frickin' frightening.
I thought that it was US companies which started inserting lines into employment contracts which make "bringing the organisation into public disrepute" a potential diciplinary offence?
I may be wrong but it is certainly used by multinationals over here.
ce
--------------------
ce
Posts: 376 | From: Middlesex, U.K. | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wood
The Milkman of Human Kindness
# 7
|
Posted
The Nestle thing is a rubbish analogy. In that case, Nestle would be the clear villain, because, unlike the police, employees of Nestle don't as a matter of course have to deal with people in situations where these attitudes could affect decisions which could alter or destroy a life.
One should, howver, be aware that had there not been a recent scandal involving police recruits and racist attitudes (and hey, let's not forget the Stephen Lawrence enquiry), the police probably wouldn't have clamped down nearly so hard.
IMHO they made examples of these men so they can say "Look! We're not institutionally racist really! We're doing something about it!"
[ 04. November 2003, 12:55: Message edited by: Wood ]
--------------------
Narcissism.
Posts: 7842 | From: Wood Towers | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ce:
I thought that it was US companies which started inserting lines into employment contracts which make "bringing the organisation into public disrepute" a potential diciplinary offence?
I may be wrong but it is certainly used by multinationals over here.
They only do it to you furriners, who are entirely too gullible and actually fall for that shit. It may be a practice in the US, but I haven't heard of it and I work for a large employer whose name is synonymous with medical ethics and integrity. I have a feeling that it may have been tried in the US, but Americans just snorted and gave them the finger.
And I KNEW the pinko brigade would eventually arrive at the conclusion that Nestle was the bad guy!! It just goes to show that anti-capitalism is stronger than anti-racism. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
Erin, tangent alert:
You guys do it over drugs. I have a very trustworthy source (ok it's Bill Bryson, I admit it) who documents a guy being approached in a bar by a woman who asked him if he had any drugs to sell.
He said that he hadn't, due to the very reasonable fact that he had never done drugs.
Anyway, she was very persistent and eventually he said he knew a guy who sometimes smoked a joint who might be able to tell her where to get some dope.
She was a company stooge and monday morning his cards were on the table under the zero-tolerance policy.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wood
The Milkman of Human Kindness
# 7
|
Posted
[edit: ironically crossposted with IBP. this is about Erin's post]
That was a cross-post, right?
And while Nestle probably does do that across Europe, I'd have thought it was against the law in the US. Isn't it?
[ 04. November 2003, 13:16: Message edited by: Wood ]
--------------------
Narcissism.
Posts: 7842 | From: Wood Towers | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
I'm just curious, but do you guys have special shutters on your windows that you close when you are sitting quietly in the dark drinking vodka and thinking Forbidden Thoughts? If not, you might want to consider it.
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moth
Shipmate
# 2589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Wood:
One should, howver, be aware that had there not been a recent scandal involving police recruits and racist attitudes (and hey, let's not forget the Stephen Lawrence enquiry), the police probably wouldn't have clamped down nearly so hard.
IMHO they made examples of these men so they can say "Look! We're not institutionally racist really! We're doing something about it!"
I think this is unnecessarily cynical. Any complaint by a member of the public is investigated at an appropriate level, and where that complaint involves racism, it is very thoroughly investigated. The Police Authority (in effect its governing body) has a duty to monitor such complaints.
Police are never 'off-duty' in the sense that they can behave exactly as they like. Complaints are not infrequently made about 'off-duty' behaviour.
It should also be noted that the Kent Police Authority recently became the first in the UK to appoint a black Chief Constable.
I think most of us who work in the public sector are well aware that racism or any lack of political correctness on or off duty could lead to a complaint being made which threatens our jobs.
--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.
Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
I think that wood is right. And not just for home furnishings.
The police appear to have made examples of these guys to prove they are tackling racism. Should the police force be allowed a special case for this type of action or could this ethos permeate all our companies so that, in 5 years time, I could be sacked for telling MrsByProxy a very humerous sexist joke.
Is it going too far? Granted, these guys could be arseholes who aren't fit to be the defenders of liberty and legality, but can they be punished for telling a racist joke?
I assume racist comments can be punished under some law in the UK, and police officers should conduct themselves in a legalistic manner outside of work - you wouldn't expect a copper to keep his job if he robbed a bank.
maybe they are a special case.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liam
Shipmate
# 4961
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IntellectByProxy:
Erin, tangent alert:
You guys do it over drugs. I have a very trustworthy source (ok it's Bill Bryson, I admit it)
US companies in this country certainly do it over drugs, and I have a first-hand source. I have a friend who worked for Budweiser, where they practise random drug tests. Interestingly, the people picked for these tests are very often the ones who've just been on an expenses-paid working trip to Glastonbury Festival or similar. Given that Budweiser is one of the biggest peddlers of recreational drugs in the world, this seems just a tad hypocritical.
They also appear to do it over politics, although perhaps not officially. The same friend was warned not to let on that she'd attended a Stop the War march, as it would make her sound 'a bit lefty'.
Posts: 138 | From: Birmingham, UK | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Scot:
I'm just curious, but do you guys have special shutters on your windows that you close when you are sitting quietly in the dark drinking vodka and thinking Forbidden Thoughts? If not, you might want to consider it.
Actually there's a litle alcove in my front room that I can squeeze into where the big video screen can't see me then and I can write dark thoughts in my double plus ungood diary.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moth
Shipmate
# 2589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Scot:
I'm just curious, but do you guys have special shutters on your windows that you close when you are sitting quietly in the dark drinking vodka and thinking Forbidden Thoughts? If not, you might want to consider it.
No, my thoughts are my own. But if you mean 'Do I think very carefully before uttering controversial views on certain matters', then yes, I do. There is very little legal control of free speech here (though admittedly more than in the US) but public sector employment policies (and those of many companies) make certain views unacceptable at higher levels of employment.
--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.
Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Space Monkey:
quote:
Originally posted by IntellectByProxy:
Erin, tangent alert:
You guys do it over drugs. I have a very trustworthy source (ok it's Bill Bryson, I admit it)
US companies in this country certainly do it over drugs, and I have a first-hand source. I have a friend who worked for Budweiser, where they practise random drug tests.
That has nothing to do with bringing the company into disrepute and everything to do with the fact that they don't want to have the living shit sued out of them. If you're ever injured by some company's employee while they were doing their job, and it turns out that they had drugs in their system at the time of the injury, you and your great-grandchildren will never have to work another day ever again.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarkycow
La belle Dame sans merci
# 1012
|
Posted
[tangent]
Whoever was saying about them being off-duty, and so it should be none of the Police Commission's business...
Policemen are rarely 'off duty' in UK. They are supposed to carry their warrant cards with them at all times, and should they see someone doing a criminal act, they have a duty to warn/arrest them (depending on penalty for said act) then call it in.
[/tangent]
I tend to think this is at least in part motivated by the recent headlines about racism in the police. If the Kent top bods had done nothing, then they would be seen as condoning racist behaviour by the police.
And how did the woman know that they were policemen? If she hadn't known this, they would have been seen as racist bastards. The fact she knew makes them racist police bastards - a rather different matter.
Sarkycow
--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”
Posts: 10787 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
KenWritez
Shipmate
# 3238
|
Posted
For those people who want to crucify the off-duty police for telling a racist joke: What's it like to be such a paragon of moral purity?
How many of you would survive a similar Inquisition for telling an "inappropriate" joke or holding an "inappropriate" belief?
Perhaps these men deserve a reprimand from their superiors; that is one thing. Saying these men aren't fit to be police is another and betrays a raging intolerance for anything short of a shallow and unreal standard of perfection.
[ 04. November 2003, 14:28: Message edited by: Kenwritez ]
--------------------
"The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be a shepherd." --Quentin Tarantino, Pulp Fiction
My blog: http://oxygenofgrace.blogspot.com
Posts: 11102 | From: Left coast of Wonderland, by the rabbit hole | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
'Justus'
Shipmate
# 2424
|
Posted
A significant part of the problem here is the 'canteen culture' in the police, identified by Lord McPherson in the Lawrence enquiry.
A further piece of news to come out of the recent story on the BNP having members in the police force was this enlightening interview with a recently retired Police Inspector John Phazey:
'The ex-copper, who helped police the Handsworth riots in the early 80s, added: "Of course you heard words like 'paki' and 'nigger' but it didn't mean any more than someone saying Paddy for an Irishman or Jerry for a German.
"It was just the language of working class blokes. There was a fair bit of leg-pulling but it was never malicious. "I remember there was one officer who, whenever an Asian officer came into the room, would go 'Coon, coon' like he was making the noise of a pigeon.
"It's like saying Paddies are as thick as two short planks or Jocks are tight-fisted. It was just jokes in the canteen. You'll get that anywhere when you have men in their 20s and 30s together." '
The full story can be read here .
If those in the Kent Police share Inspector Phazey's view that this is all a bit of joshing, leg pulling and no harm done then the inquiry into the death of Stephen Lawrence was in vain.
Posts: 295 | From: York | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
Racism may well be a special case because it is so emotive at the moment.
If the police were caught making mother-in-law gags it wouldn't be a problem, but racism is high on the police agenda at the moment.
I'm not saying the action is right, the jury is still out for me on that one, but racism is a big issue at the moment.
Maybe it's wrong, but I think racist comments are far worse than sexist comments, or mother-in-law-ist comments. I don't ever tell racist jokes (I don't know any anyway) but I do occasionally tell sexist jokes (but only to people who I know intimately)
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alaric the Goth
Shipmate
# 511
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kenwritez:
For those people who want to crucify the off-duty police for telling a racist joke: What's it like to be such a paragon of moral purity?
How many of you would survive a similar Inquisition for telling an "inappropriate" joke or holding an "inappropriate" belief?
Perhaps these men deserve a reprimand from their superiors; that is one thing. Saying these men aren't fit to be police is another and betrays a raging intolerance for anything short of a shallow and unreal standard of perfection.
Well said, Kenwritez. Though I say this as someone who has held racist opinions (see below), so maybe the people posting here will see fit to ignore what I say in support of your post.
Racism, as Erin said, cannot be controlled by the State or anyone else, or removed by acting to dismiss people or make illegal things like telling jokes. All that is increasingly being done is to curb its expression. This does not stop it from going on in people's heads, or from it entering convesations where all involved are almost certain to find it acceptable, and 'know' that much about each other . And that clampdown on its expression can be seen (by the racists, and by 'radical' defenders of freedom of speech) as taking away basic rights to think and speak 'freely'. You cannot (unless you go down the 1984 'Big Brother' road) force people to think how you want them to.
I have sometimes sought to address the racist attitudes I held, and have 'moved forward'. I know very few people who share them and those I have talked to/prayed with about them have seen them as being things I really ought not to continue to have. But they have proved at times very resistant to change. Sometimes it has been 'two steps forward and one back'. It has to be me wanting to change, however, not someone 'telling me what I'm allowed to think'. That, as often as not, makes me want to go 'the other way'.
I take a great risk, I feel, in posting this here. I realise that many of you feel that racism is one of the worst things anyone can think/utter, especially if they are a Christian. Even now I do not entirely want to stop thinking the way I did/do. I find it all too easy to do so. Please, if you want to 'help' me with this, don't simply call me a 'racist bastard' or words to that effect. If that is what you think, keep it to yourself if you can. I am hesitant to click the 'add reply' button (I already deleted an earlier post that said much the same thing). Here goes.
Posts: 3322 | From: West Thriding | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
Holding innate racism can be a product of your upbringing, your environment, anything. That doesn't make it right, but it does make it understandable.
What is not acceptable is racist behaviour. I assume you do not exhibit racist behaviour.
I probably harbour racism, in that subconciously I probably judge people on their race, but as far as I know I don't do anything which would manifest racism and that is the important thing.
It would be lovely if nobody in the world felt any different to one of a different race, but people do, and that is racism.
What is wholely unacceptable is if these innate feelings change how one reacts to a person of a different race. If it does this is racist.
Racist is diferent from racism. Both are bad but racist is worse.
In my opinion.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Genie
Shipmate
# 3282
|
Posted
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif) Alaric
--------------------
Alleluia, Christ is risen!
Posts: 762 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IntellectByProxy:
Bollocks
Bollocks
Bollocks
Bollocks
Don't make excuses for racism because 'everyone does it'. I don't. My <<yadayadayada>> anyone. Maybe I am lucky in the company I keep, but to say 'everyone does it' is a gross and offensive generalisation.
Bollocks.
I didn't say everyone is racist. I said everyone has some group of people they make the butt of poor humor; whether that group is republicans, women, old people, druids, Macedonians, dog catchers, nuns, baptists, lawyers, blondes, people who wear FCUK shirts, etc. Everyone has a group whom they consider inferior in some way. Simple truth, my boy. Anyone who tells you different and believes it is lying to two people.
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
Says you. On the basis of no evidence whatsoever.
When those people are entrusted with the safety of others, it is prudent to ensure they do not in fact harbour attitudes that will hinder their ability to do the job properly. If racist attitudes underlie the racist joking, then we need to know about it.
Because of course their right to harbour racist attitudes is more important than the right of the public - all members of it - to have a police force that actually has their best interests at heart? Doesn't the police force, as an employer, have the right to ensure its members have the appropriate aptitude for the job? Racism is prima facie evidence one cannot effectively police a multi-cultural country.
Well, gee Karl - shouldn't we know that about everybody then? Trash collectors, firemen, teachers, doctors, lawyers, anybody that owns a business? The general public has a right to be treated fairly by all of these people. Perhaps a racist trash collector would have nul effect, but its far more dangerous for the community to have a teacher that harbors racism than a cop that does.
Telling a racist jokes does not make one racist. Just as telling a joke about christians does not make me a satanist. If someone is accused of performing an action, such as denying employment, physical assault, or whatever - then by all means an investigation should be done, and the "ethnic" public would have every right to question the fairness of (in this example) the police department.
Growing up in America, I learned a very important truth at an early age, and apply it in my life daily. Wish other people would.
Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kenwritez:
For those people who want to crucify the off-duty police for telling a racist joke: What's it like to be such a paragon of moral purity?
Hmmm - I'm not sure anyone's said they want to. The question is whether the jokes are symptomatic of an underlying attitude which will make it very difficult for them to carry out their duties in a manner which serves their entire community. This is what any enquiry should be about. Not "crucifying" anyone for racist humour per se.
quote:
How many of you would survive a similar Inquisition for telling an "inappropriate" joke or holding an "inappropriate" belief?
Indeed not. Hence what I just said.
quote:
Perhaps these men deserve a reprimand from their superiors; that is one thing. Saying these men aren't fit to be police is another and betrays a raging intolerance for anything short of a shallow and unreal standard of perfection.
Which is why an enquiry is required to establish whether they are fit to be police or not. In the present climate, merely ignoring the incident will seriously damage public confidence in the police.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Bullshitted by Non-Propheteer:
Growing up in America, I learned a very important truth at an early age, and apply it in my life daily. Wish other people would.
Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.
NP
Growing up with Aspergers and glasses, I can assue you that's the biggest piece of bullshit anyone ever said to a kid. Words do hurt, they hurt a great deal, and 25 years later I'm still recovering from the wounds. If you think it's just a case of "applying it in everyday life", you can fuck off and die, because you an ignorant twat. Repeating this bullshit mantra just reopens the wounds and retwists the knife.
[ 04. November 2003, 15:41: Message edited by: Karl - Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Presleyterian
Shipmate
# 1915
|
Posted
Absent a clause in a union contract or individual employment agreement to the contrary, the default setting in the US is that employees can be fired for good reason, bad reason, or no reason at all. That's why it's not unusual to see a person involved in a messy public situation wholly unrelated to their employment get "coincidentally" laid off at just the moment that their employer's name starts appearing in embarrassing newspaper articles.
So although there are thousands of American companies that routinely insert "We can fire you for what you do on your off-time" clauses in employment contracts, the smarter -- and better counseled -- ones don't say anything and just exercise the employee-at-will doctrine to fire workers who become public liabilities.
Of course, as public employees, cops have some additional procedural protections, but generally speaking the only reason a fired employee would have a casue of action would be if he or she could bear the heavy of burden of proving that the firing was motivated by race, sex, religion, or ethnicity.
And Karl, I don't at all disagree that words can and do hurt more than the sticks and stones. I just don't think bruised feelings should be legally actionable.
[ 04. November 2003, 15:47: Message edited by: Presleyterian ]
Posts: 2450 | From: US | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
quote:
Originally posted by Scot:
I'm just curious, but do you guys have special shutters on your windows that you close when you are sitting quietly in the dark drinking vodka and thinking Forbidden Thoughts? If not, you might want to consider it.
No, my thoughts are my own. But if you mean 'Do I think very carefully before uttering controversial views on certain matters', then yes, I do. There is very little legal control of free speech here (though admittedly more than in the US) but public sector employment policies (and those of many companies) make certain views unacceptable at higher levels of employment.
Actually, I think he is referring to the possibility that in the future you will have to hide from the Thought police. Hence the shutters.
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
nonpropheteer:
Most of the groups you mention in your diatribe:
quote:
republicans, women, old people, druids, Macedonians, dog catchers, nuns, baptists, lawyers, blondes, people who wear FCUK shirts, etc. Everyone has a group whom they consider inferior in some way
...are not races so making a joke about them is not racist. In fact the only possible race there are the Macedonians, and I can't think of anything funny about them.
Making jokes about a nun is very different from making jokes about a black person, because the nun has never, as far as I know, been the recipient of enforced slavery, inferiority and societal exemption.
The bit where you say:
quote:
Everyone has a group whom they consider inferior in some way
...is very telling about you. I can think of no group I consider inferior. That would make me a snob and a wanker.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by Kenwritez:
quote:
Perhaps these men deserve a reprimand from their superiors; that is one thing. Saying these men aren't fit to be police is another and betrays a raging intolerance for anything short of a shallow and unreal standard of perfection.
I think that's about it. Official reprimand followed by a note on their file for a couple of years would be my verdict. The amazing thing is how the hell were they rumbled as coppers? Drinking in uniform? Someone complaining followed by a drunken officer saying "Piss off or we'll nick you". If either of those were the case then they deserve everything they get.
A few years ago, I regularly had dealings with the people who work in the rather heavy end of law enforcement. They tended to be young (i.e. 20s-30s) men with more testosterone than brains (which is not the same as saying they are stupid). Whether one likes it or not, they are not going to be Guardian readers with interests in Buddhism, the philosophy of Wittgenstein and the music of the Kronos quartet.
I think that the tax payer has a right to expect standards of professionalism which includes not getting oneself splashed across the pages of the popular press making jokes of an unsavoury nature. The tax payer also has a right to a police force which is percieved to be fair to all the citizens of the UK, including those from ethnic minorities. If those sort of boundaries are crossed then I think that some form of disciplinary action is clearly appropriate. But the police do an extremely difficult job, often at great personal cost to themselves. I think it not unreasonable that they be cut some slack when, in an instance such as this one, a serious reprimand would probably prevent a recurrence.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Riv
Shipmate
# 3553
|
Posted
From the article in the OP: quote:
Chief Superintendent Robert Chidley said an allegation that a racist joke had been told on the coach had been found not to involve a police officer.
Institutional Police racism may be of relevant concern, but the eight officers mentioned don't appear to remain in question.
--------------------
"I don't know whether I like it, but it's what I meant." Ralph Vaughan Williams
"Riv, you've done a much better job communicating your passion than your point. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about." Tom Clune
Posts: 2749 | From: Too far South, USA. I really want to move. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liam
Shipmate
# 4961
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
That has nothing to do with bringing the company into disrepute and everything to do with the fact that they don't want to have the living shit sued out of them. If you're ever injured by some company's employee while they were doing their job, and it turns out that they had drugs in their system at the time of the injury, you and your great-grandchildren will never have to work another day ever again.
Errmm.. she, and everyone she knew, worked in marketing. No heavy machinery, in fact no contact with customers or the public whatsoever. And in any case, suing people at the drop of a hat isn't standard practice in this country yet.
So I think it's reasonable to assume the motivation is to protect the public image (of a drug selling company, ridiculously enough) and control their employees. I wish I lived in a world where corporations had such innocent motivations as you imagine, but I really don't see it.
Posts: 138 | From: Birmingham, UK | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Bullshitted by Non-Propheteer:
Growing up in America, I learned a very important truth at an early age, and apply it in my life daily. Wish other people would.
Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.
NP
Growing up with Aspergers and glasses, I can assue you that's the biggest piece of bullshit anyone ever said to a kid. Words do hurt, ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif) they hurt a great deal, and 25 years later I'm still recovering from the wounds. If you think it's just a case of "applying it in everyday life", you can fuck off and die, because you [ARE] an ignorant twat. Repeating this bullshit mantra just reopens the wounds and retwists the knife.
I hope you can hear me over this solo violin.
I was a chubby encyclopedia-reading Dungeons and Dragons geek. Some claim I still am. I much preferred the taunts over the bullies. And I know for a fact that it is as simple as applying it daily in my life.
Ignorant twat? ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
How could I possibly top that insult?
NP
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
You don't have a fucking clue, do you? I had both, and both hurt.
Your problem is you assume that because you could shrug it off, anyone can, and if they couldn't, that's somehow their fault.
I know the damage the words did. Having you talk about it as if it's just oversensitive whining is particularly nasty. But hey, it's my fault somehow, isn't it? Should have just shrugged it off.
Arsehole.
[ 04. November 2003, 16:14: Message edited by: Karl - Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Riv
Shipmate
# 3553
|
Posted
Many races have endured slavery. Blacks are not alone in that distinction.
It may be worth noting that all humor involving race and/or Nationality isn't necessarily evil. In some cases, those very races may even champion those jokes. I have experienced this first-hand in the Jewish community where I live. There are some really hilarious Jewish Mother jokes that have been told to me by Jews during the High Holy Days! C'mon, now. Consistent truths about a particular group -- let's call them by their nasty little name -- stereotypes -- are played upon for their comic content because in some way they often contain a grain of appreciable truth. In some ways, to me, it's even a kind of celebration of some aspects of a group. When those stereotypes are twisted to the detrement of a race or group, sure, call foul and loudly. But, for pity's sake, you've got to concede a place for the humorous enjoyment of the very things that define the diversity to which we all contribute and that we all need and enjoy.
--------------------
"I don't know whether I like it, but it's what I meant." Ralph Vaughan Williams
"Riv, you've done a much better job communicating your passion than your point. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about." Tom Clune
Posts: 2749 | From: Too far South, USA. I really want to move. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
