|
|
|
|
As some may know, the various Equalities Acts in the UK that deal with discrimination on grounds of sex, gender, age, religion, sexual orientation, race, disability are all slightly different, and have rather different areas of exclusion.
There is a proposal to replace all of these Acts with a "Single Equalities Bill". The Westminster Government has just opened consultation on this proposal, under the title "A Framework for Fairness" If anyone in the UK is interested, the full consultation paper, a summary, and an "easy-read" version, are available from http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1511245 .
The summary says "Matters of equality should be of interest to a wide range of people: employers and service providers in the public, private and voluntary sectors; and employees and members of the public who are customers for goods and services or who make use of public or private sector facilities. The Government is keen to encourage responses to the consultation from all those interested."
"Political correctness gone mad?"
This is chance for everyone to put their views in a dispassionate and coherent fashion. I'd urge UK residents to participate, even - or perhaps especially - if they feel that there is too much "political correctness gone mad" in the field of equalities at present: this consultation represents an excellent chance to build a stable consensus approach to dealing with some of the real equalities issues that remain in the UK.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
I'm going to look at this in some detail.
In many ways I feel discriminated against because I'm white! I no longer feel discriminated against because I'm gay. I do find these consultation periods have very little point. Like a public enquiry they are a sop to the masses rather than a real mechanism for change, but we have to do it because, if we don;t, we can't complain
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy wrote:
> ... Like a public enquiry they are a sop to the masses rather than a real mechanism for change, but we have to do it because, if we don;t, we can't complain
I think that's a key point, timmy! I'm sure that any changes that come out of the consultation won't meet with universal approval.
However, I think it's important that those who do feel that the balance is wrong in some way, or that there is too much emphasis on words and rules ("political correctness") should take this chance to explain their vision (whether it be equality of treatment, equality of opportunity, or indeed of limits to equality).
One of the concerns that I personally have is that I feel there's a big difference between things that appear easy to see and discriminate on (sex, ethnicity, age, visible disabilities), and things that are unlikely to be known unless a person chooses to reveal them (non-visible disabilities, sexual orientation, religion). I'm not at all sure that it's appropriate to treat these in the same way.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
saben
|
 |
On fire! |
Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537
|
|
|
I think the populist point of view does have to be taken into account! A lot of straight, white males in modern society feel that the government treats them as just another person, whereas they treat the minorities like something special. Without taking into account the rights of the majority into account the chances of a radical party that DOES appeal to the majority getting into power increases dramatically!
Those that know a little about Australian politics will probably remember the One Nation party led by a woman named Pauline Hanson. She espoused unity and some of her complaints were legitimate, but she was extremely undereducated and took such a naive, broad approach to her policies that in the end everyone realised she was nuts and she even went to jail over her party's illegitimate formation. Prior to that though in some parts of the country her popularity was over 10%, she had taken over as the largest minor party in under a year- she was a real threat.
My point is, unless we look at making things fair for EVERYONE nuts like her will be a threat. I live on a major highway opposite the beach, but inland from me, across the other side of the highway is one of the suburbs with the worst reputations in Melbourne. It is ghetto. It is slummy and poor, pregnant teens, alcoholics and loonies abound. Most of them are white. Yet they are just as disadvantaged as most Australian aboriginals I've seen/ met. Some would say that the aboriginals have the race factor to deal with- that they have a visual disadvantaged and are judged the moment the colour of their face is seen. I'd counter that there is a distinct visual disadvantage for people from Frankston, too. They have no social awareness, no idea of personal hygeine, fashion or anything. I take one look at one and it is hard not to judge. Just like it can be hard not to judge an aboriginal. Race isn't the problem so much as poverty is.
I think that with all the talk of equality it's important to remember that a poor white bastard and a poor black bastard aren't so different. Yet in Australia the poor black bastards ARE given more- they get a different government payment, access to different subsidies. Yet they blow it all away just like a poor white bastard would if given the same. There still is racism, but classism, in Australia at least, seems to be just as rampant. "Bogans" are insulted more in the average school than "abos" I'd wager.
And men have their own issues to face. Not to take away from feminism, but I believe male and female rights are BOTH important. Both genders face different kinds of discrimination. Wives can be abusive, too, even if it's not usually as physically abusive as men are.
So what's my point? While I am a strong supporter of equality, the door really does need to swing both ways. Treating everyone as an equal often ignores the disadvantages certain groups face. But everyone faces different disadvantages- we can prevent some through legislation, but in helping some groups against discrimination we need to assure that the help we provide isn't unfair and is RELEVANT. Poor black people are no more deserving of having money thrown at them than poor white people. If political correctness makes it wrong to joke about women being dumb, then surely it makes it wrong to joke about men being dumb! There are things that can legitimately done, but creating boxes with barriers between each really ignores the fact that we are all individuals. Whatever box we are a part of each person should be judged according to their own worth.
Political correctness should not stop a straight white man getting a job over a black lesbian if the straight white man is more qualified. Giving the black lesbian a job out of "charity" is an insult and if you want to see inequality- that is it right there.
Look at this tree. I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time [...] No matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach.
Master Oogway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in the UK, the door DOES swing both ways. There is no law that says its unlawful to discriminate because someone is gay, but the Equality Act 2006 makes it unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation.
Last year, 3 black men were imprisoned for a racially aggravated assault on a white man in Scotland. There is at least 1 successful case where a woman was found guilty of sexual harassment....
Single Equality Act... the problem is... as ever... Europe.
Our current laws are inline with europe, indeed, in some areas exceed europe, but europe is currently passing its own unifying legislation, the Recast Equal Treatment Directive, to come into force, i believe, in 2009. And unless our laws meet or exceed their standards already, we'll have to amend our own everytime they do so, which is the principle reason why we have so many acts in the first place.
Odi et amo: quare id faciam, fortasse requiris.
Nescio, set fieri sentio et excrucior
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I really am unaware of what the situation is in Europe or the UK. The main thing that comes to mind as regards the changes that have come about in the US is just as much about representation as equity with in government and its entire branch of services. Though it hasn’t changed to a great degree here yet, I think it is of the utmost importance for all of the people to feel enfranchised.
I agree with Saben about the poor, despite ethnicity, all should receive equal subsidies. My main concern is what government and societies are doing is a bit wrong headed. I realize that there are those that may never want to work, but it would behoove all for government and the business community to facilitate ways for the poor, unwashed and unfashionable alcoholic loony masses devices for a way out of that predicament. When I look at slums what I see that is most overwhelming is hopelessness that I think leads to most of these conditions.
To sum up my thoughts, it’s more, as I said, a matter of enfranchisement than equity, otherwise you’ll just be throwing words and money down a deep dark hole. imho
People will tell you where they've gone
They'll tell you where to go
But till you get there yourself you never really know
Where some have found their paradise
Other's just come to harm
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
