Monday 18 January 2010


Society views it as “Racist” and unacceptable to ridicule/make jokes about what they call the Black ‘minority’.
Anti-Racist purists say it is about ‘Race’ and not about colour and that is not true.
I can’t tell a Black American from a Black British from a Black African from a Black Canadian. I cannot identify their ‘Race’ but I can see their COLOUR at a glance and it is their COLOUR that gains the attention and ire of the ‘Racist’. The ‘Racist’ doesn’t care where the Black person comes from it is the fact that they are Black which sets them off.
If a ‘Racist’ says to a Black person in the UK “Why don’t you go home?” The chances are the Black person will say “I am home, I’m British, like you”

If that Black person is British and I am British then ‘Race’ is not the issue. COLOUR is what attracts the anger and hatred of the ‘Racist’.

So why is it unacceptable to offensively stereotype ‘name call’, abuse and ridicule the ‘massive’ Black ‘minority’ - yet totally acceptable to constantly, relentlessly, incessantly target the smallest, most highly visible minority of COLOUR in the UK with verbal abuse, ‘name calling’, stereotyping, ridicule and mockery.
There is much historical evidence to prove that the contempt of NATURAL redheads is deeply entrenched/ingrained in the British psyche.
How can a redhead like Paul MacInnes of the Guardian suggest that it is subversive to demand equality?. Demanding freedom from mental, emotional and psychological torment cannot be deemed subversive. He attributes the deaths of Kelsey Winter and Adam Bailey to ‘thin skin’. I find it difficult to understand redheads like him who happily conform even though it is clear their feeble acquiescence to the majorities abusive power and control is costing other redheads their sanity and even their lives.

Why do such redheads consider the pursuit of freedom and happiness should be the preserve of Blacks and that Reds are not entitled to demand EQUAL treatment and respect for those born RED as is afforded by society at large, by the law, to those born Black?
Only Blacks are allowed to be offended by stereotyping, 'name calling' & ridicule who are these 'Racists' who say Blacks are so different from Reds?


Nate said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nate said...

Ok Madasa,

I can NOT help you with your mental health at all! You state that you are seeking help for that, and I am glad you are seeking the help that you need.

I can however help you with your writing on this blog... to help you communicate your ideas a little clearer... BOTH grammatically and ideas wise... Because if I'm not understanding a lot of what you are posting... it is likely that many others will not understand what you are saying either.


You do the same for me. Help me to edit my writing... BOTH grammatically and ideas wise... Many people do not understand what I am writing about either.

This will be a long process... I can commit to editing one article a fortnight from you... with the expectation that you will do the same in return.

You do not have to accept my editing and I cant stop you from posting anything you want on (yeah New Media!).

What I hope will happen is the quality of both your and my posting standards will lift when edited.

I am proposing that we setup a blog that requires a password to see. You and I will both have the password and communicate with each other that way, for editing purposes only!

The only condition that I want to set... that I am completely unsure that you will agree to or not is that there should be a ZERO tolerance of racism.

Would you agree to a ZERO tolerance to racism?

If yes, would you agree to setting up an editing blog?

Anonymous said...

Nate, I don't need your help with my mental health. I don't need lessons in English either. If others don't understand they are welcome to say so. You think academically and I think emotionally, psychologically and logically. All I'm doing is asking the questions. I don't write anything 'Racist' and I resent the suggestion that I do. The media originally asked the question if gingerism is as bad as 'Racism' it is not my proposition. I merely continue the theme which in a free country I should be entitled to do. If kids are dying because of gingerism it should be a lot more than an academic, well educated debate. Madasa

Anonymous said...

I think I would have been in trouble long before now if anything I blogged could be considered 'Racist'. You act as though saying the word 'Racist' is 'Racist'. I merely question why one minority group of colour is considered better, or more special, or so psychologically different that they are badly affected by hearing their colour maligned and belittled and I am supposed not to be similarly affected by the same cause. I am acknowledged to be imaginative and creative I don't need anyone putting idea's in my head. Thanx. Madasa

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Nate, you could explain to me why kids dying because of gingerism is not as bad as kids dying because of 'Racism'. Madasa

Anonymous said...

I don't think Masada is being racist by discussing racism? You've made a pretty baseless conclusion by linking those two thoughts Nate, and fairly arrogant suggestion that you should be editing others thoughts whether understood by the masses or not. A blog is free speech at it's core is it not?

John McAndrew said...


if you are gettting help for your mental problems, you need to be honest:

Is it that you're Ginger or racially isolated that is part of your problem?

For me, my problem is my racial isolation and the way groups of people from other parts of the world are replacing a culture that once promoted my racial identity with their own.

Would you benefit from being part of a community that normalises the racial identity of the Ginger people and prosecutes people over the racial harrassement of Ginger people if necessary?

For me, yes.

Black people are not just a massive minority in the UK, but also a world majority when you consider their racial identity and dignity is being promoted through out the whole of Africa and other parts of the world. In comparison, the Ginger people are a tiny world minority that was using the UK and Ireland to promote their racial identity with that of the Blondes and Brunettes. They are now being racially marginilised by the main world majorities that are the least Ginger looking.

We all know that fundamentally we're psychologically the same. But to prevent the powerfully establised from smashing the place up and causing a riot means Black people have to be given priority over Ginger people. It's far far easier to psychologically trample on a Blonde or Ginger person and to get away with it compared to a Black person today.

Nate said...


Firstly, I am simply offering you a chance to collaborate on a few posts together, with you still continuing to blog as much as you like on but judging by your response I am dreaming, right?

Secondly, to address your response...

"I don't write anything 'Racist' and I resent the suggestion that I do."

I am very glad that you feel this way Madasa... I honestly do, but can I make you aware of or draw your attention to the fact that... to reduce a person to a colour whether its 'ginger' or 'black' is de-humanising, discriminatory and prejudicial. If you don't understand the meaning of the words 'dehumanising', 'discriminatory' and 'prejudicial' then look it up in the dictionary.

To identify a persons by their geographical and cultural location (GCL) or nationality is just that, expressing that persons place of birth and heritage. For example I am Australian-English-Welsh.

The term 'black' or 'blacks' is considered by many including myself to be racist. How about addressing each person by their GCL or nationality. For example there are African-English and Jamaican-English and so on in England.

If you are referring specifically to a persons or group of peoples skin tone then you need to make reference that you are making that distinction to their skin tone each and every time... For example the words 'darker skin tone' or 'African-like skin tone' etc... not simply 'black' or 'blacks' these terms are especially considered by many to be racist... and also in my opinion to be racist.

If your talking about a specific person then find out what specific description is that they prefer, if you cant find out that information, then its best to apologise in your writing for having to make an assumption.

"The media originally asked the question if gingerism is as bad as 'Racism' it is not my proposition."

If it is not your proposition then you need to make clear that it is a reference each and every time. At the moment it impossible to tell that this is what you are doing by simply just reading your writing.

"If kids are dying because of gingerism it should be a lot more than an academic, well educated debate."

I agree with this statement... but I don't think that because you claim to be 'un-academic' or 'less-educated' that this gives you an excuse to be racist. I don't know how much weight you put in my posts or comments, but after you've been informed that what you are writing can be considered to be racist... will you stop?

Please understand Madasa this comment is not an attack on your personally Madasa, but it is a criticism of your writing. You have stated you are not being racist, and I believe you believe this... but it is not how your writing reads!

Nate said...

Again I am genuinely offering to help you make your opinion clear Madasa.

I often agree with your sentiment Madasa... how many times have you heard that?

Anonymous said...

Re: The last 2 comments raise 2 questions
a) Why bring Blonde into the arena when Blonde is acknowledged to be the most desired colour, the most gorgeous. Most Blondes are NOT Blonde but Bleach and the 'I'm having a Blonde moment' is a joke which confirms to them that they are desirable and gorgeous Blondes which they are NOT. Ginger on the other hand is reputed to be funny, silly, naff, crap, ugly and the 'insults' are directly solely at the NATURAL redhead as dyed red hair is all manner of fabulous shades worn by people who have not endured the sort of bullying experienced by Kelsey, Adam and others in the British schoolyard. My problem John is NOT MY COLOUR it is OTHER PEOPLE'S REACTION TO THE COLOUR that is my problem. I have found that to socially exclude and isolate myself is the best and only way for me to survive.
B]The anti-semitism point brought to mind another word that explains those redheads in the media and politics who collude in their own or our subjugation, 'hegemonic', which is COLLABORATORS.

Anonymous said...

I am not racist. I am not being racist. I'm sure my comments would not be posted if they were deemed racist by whoever checks these things. I'm sure I would have been reported to the police, or the powers that be and visited by same if any of my comments were racist. Questions about racism are not in and of themselves racist. It would seem Nate that you are as paranoid and obsessive about the word 'racism' as I am about the word 'ginger' Madasa

Anonymous said...

It may interest Nate to know that I email many of my blogs bothering as many media outlets with the thoughts of Madass. I'm sure some get spammed, a few have been replied to but none has generated accusations or charges of 'Racism'. Collaborating is not my thing Nate. I like to come straight to the point though obviously not pointedly enough to penetrate your understanding.

Nate said...

Ok Madasa,

Do you like being called 'ginger', No you don't... you have stated this numerous times.

Many, many people of African or Jamaican or some other decent where the tone of their skin is darker do not like being called 'black'.

Can you Madasa see why anyone would want to help you stop gingerism while you are being racist?

Nate said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nate said...

Also Madasa,

Nobody 'checks these things'... posts or comments on obscure websites.

Nate said...

ALSO Madasa,

If you believe there is some authority out there banning racist websites you are wrong...

Here is an example:

Madasa it is up to you to stop being racist... only you can change the way you write.

Please stop writing like a racist, PLEASE...

Anonymous said...

I'm hopping mad. As a diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic I'm in 2 minds whether to continue to speak to Nate. I've 1/2 a mind to meet up and smack him in the mouth but such mindless fantasies will get me nowhere. I am not being racist Nate. Is it your intention now to have several different descriptions for people of a darker skin tones if so perhaps you could tell me what they are and to whom they apply and I will do my best to either exclude or include such descriptions so as not to cause offence to any. My paranoia about Big Brother? You can well believe sites are being monitored and if it suits the purpose of Big Brother - then he will act - The only difference between the Chinese govt. and ours is that they are censoring data not just monitoring

Anonymous said...

For anyone bored enough a word count might be interesting as to who has used the dreaded 'R' word more often than Nate, in a totally unneccessary way to impress us that he is not. I suggest he doesn't try bringing a discrimination case to court as he will probably veer off the point to impress upon us that neopolitan ice creams don't like being called neopolitan because they are not from naples. Keep to the point of why redheaded kids are dead mate and the causes

Nate said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nate said...

"Is it your intention now to have several different descriptions for people of a darker skin tones if so perhaps you could tell me what they are and to whom they apply and I will do my best to either exclude or include such descriptions so as not to cause offence to any."

I hope your serious about this and its not sarcastic...

Its about having different descriptions that suit the context of what you are communicating.

Its best to always avoid using words to describe a person or group of people with words that have negative connotations, for example: 'ginger', even when using the word as its colour definition, i.e. 'ginger haired' to describe redheads should be avoided... because the usage of the word 'ginger' has picked up so many negative connotations for redheads... this is being politically correct and treating each person as a person.

If the group that you are trying to describe has a preferred term of usage then use it.

The description for each person with a darker skin tone is different. If your referring to a person from England with a heritage from Sudan, then its not unreasonable to describe the person as 'Sudanese-English or English-Sudanese with darker skin'. Its still appropriate to define that you are referencing their skin tone because not all people from Sudan have a dark skin tone...

Because nobody is 'black' in the context we are using then you should always specify a geographical location.

If your serious about a ZERO tolerance to racism re-write your article making it politically correct. All you have to do is hit edit post.

If you need a hand let me know.

Anonymous said...

nate, You're a twat. how many times must i repeat that nothing I have written is racist and how is anyone supposed to know at a glance that someone is sudanese? Did you take you degree in talking long winded bollox?

Nate said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nate said...


The post to this comment page is purely ignorant racism.

You Madasa are an ignorant racist. I wont have anything more to do with you except to rip to shreds the racist bs you write.

I'm done.

Anonymous said...

this aussie geezer is going well ape OOOOOO rang ah!

John McAndrew said...


you're saying that to identify someone purely on the basis of some quality they have is dehumanising. I say it depends upon motive. We're fundamentally a life with a set of qualities that in total define our lives. But if in a group of women I was pointed out as "the man over there", would that be dehumanising? If the person pointing me out was a stranger, then no, if a colleague then yes because it meant they couldn't be bothered to remember my name and some could interpret it as sexist. So singling out someone on the basis of some quality they have is fine, depending upon the motive.

Madasa is perfectly correct setting up a blog and questioning the inequality that exists between one group of people that racialise themselves as Black, when it's to their advantage to do so, and another group that are perfectly entitled to racialise themselves as Red. Then to question whether there are psychological differences between the two. This is exactly what Black people did when questioning whether there was a difference between the humanity of a White person and a Black person. Women did the same, using "woman" to define themselves when they created Feminism.


You underestimate the psychological damage caused to Blonde people with the way some people belittle them so they don't have to take them seriously, with some dyeing their hair brown to cope. I read a few years ago in the paper about a Blonde girl being attacked, with one of the attackers saying "let's get the Blonde". I've been on a bus where two guys behind me were lauging at a guy outside with brilliant white blonde hair, and the guy came onto the bus and went ballistic at them.

Some Blondes have set up Blondeism accounts protesting about the way they are being undermined as humanbeings:

Anonymous said...

this guy nate seems determined to tell maddassa what to think, what to write and how to write it. He seems unable to distinguish between - posing a question about 'Racism' and - making a 'Racist' statement. He is having too many niggardly, nit picking, pedantic rants. Loosen your collar nate or take a cold shower.

Anonymous said...

Dear John, I take on board what you say about Blondes. It may well be possible that fake blondes like fake redheads are having a better time of it than the natural born varieties. I believe and have tried to make the point several times that the individual being bullied, for whatever reason, feels the same psychological, emotional and physical pain, if violence is involved. I try to focus on the original premise/question "Is gingerism as bad as racism?" mainly because the 2 groups involved are both minorities and the colour of birth is what attracts the attention". I would like the site to have a sensible discussion on why 2 different groups who appear to be targeted for the same reason of 'colour' are treated so differently by the law and by society at large. If the questions posed were considered and answered then perhaps we could move on to other area's. I rapidly come to the conclusion that Nate argues 'race, race, race because he hasn't got any reasonable answers to the questions and isn't a big enough bloke to say 'I don't know - I'm not sure'. You're a 'racist' madasa, I'm not a 'racist', edit your 'racist' blog madasa, you 'racist'. Nate says, often, to detract attention from the fact that he hasn't got much else to say.

Anonymous said...

Let me put it another way. I can't see that Tom Cruise is American, or that Sean Connery is Scottish, or that David Beckham played for Manchester United. If I witnessed an incident involving any of these people I would describe them to the police, if asked, as white and male. If I then went on to say I wasn't too sure about Tom Cruise as he possibly had a Spanish granny, the police would not be impressed. I think Nate, you are being totally petty and pedantic in your determination to prove that YOU are not 'Racist' and YOU are very politically, correctly aware. I think we all get the drift Thank you. Madasa

Anonymous said...

"Who wants a fag?" Not a homophobe surely. PC or Not PC that is the question. Whether tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous accusations of being 'Racist' or to sling your hook and not rise to the bait Nate

John McAndrew said...

It's an interesting discussion between Nate and Madasa:

Is singling someone out as Red or Black racist and dehumanising?

If so, what about as male and female as being sexist and dehumanising?

Describing someone as a paraplegic equals ableism and dehumanisation?

Maybe Nate is suggesting Madasa should describe Blacks and Reds as people with a racial identity that is either Red or Black. If in doubt, put person on the end.

Anonymous said...

John is right to keep reminding us that lots of groups and individuals suffer discrimination and I would be happy if all discrimination could be halted, however human nature being as it is, that is highly unlikely and this site is supposed to be highlighting the prejudice as directed at redheads in particular.

Anonymous said...

This article is what I've been thinking since about 7 years old, why does the black kid get treated right and I don't?

This thing is, redheads haven't been in slavery for hundreds of years, or in a holocaust where millions have been killed; what I'm saying is we're the last 'area' of people that are different enough to be bullied on - and haven't suffered anything or there isn't a law against it.

I'm hoping I will look back on this when I am older to see that society has accepted everyone, not just those who have suffered. That the more different the better - this is what I am hoping for.

Anonymous said...

I agree with this post. The hatred toward gingers is a form of racism. Racism has been about grouping people based on observing their physical features and then using those features to make judgments about the persons' character and to discriminate against them and do violence toward them.

Racism is a spectrum. A group does not have to have been in slavery or had a holocaust on them to be experiencing racism in society today. It's not a competition to decide who is the most oppressed!! Again, it's a spectrum.

When you look at someone and instantly make a judgment about their character or kick them or discriminate for employment or housing or whatever just based on their having pale skin, freckles and red hair then that is indeed racism.

And just because gingers don't have a strong cultural cohesiveness does not mean they are not a race as, again, race has been traditionally defined by outward appearances not cultural identity excepting, of course, hispanics, so you can see how confusing it can get. It just goes to show that race is purely a social construction.

That people deny gingers are an oppressed race is just excuse-making for the oppression to continue. It's socially acceptable to hate on this group of people.

I live in the USA where this ginger racism has suddenly become in fashion. When I was a kid I got teased for being a ginger, but I see it as being kid stuff, silly name calling that kids do, they always find something you know.

People are actually directing some very scary violence toward red heads here, in the last few years. It reminds me of the things I'd seen back in the 70s when blacks were moving into my city. I had a black friend who was constantly chased, kicked and beat by white kids. Now I'm seeing the same thing happening to gingers. It is the same behavior, exactly identical, but a different group being targeted, so you cannot tell me this is not racism.

Anonymous said...

Having read through this thread, I concur that Nate is a troll.