tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-485321436646277553.post3980243154955560597..comments2023-04-24T10:53:31.677+01:00Comments on Gingerism: The Equality and Human Rights Commission on gingerismKeironhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08835105613651620435noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-485321436646277553.post-15571346307980742952012-01-17T16:05:30.914+00:002012-01-17T16:05:30.914+00:00Gingers have been sacrificed in history, let us no...Gingers have been sacrificed in history, let us not forget that. To the Spanish Inquisition red hair was PROOF that one had stolen the fire of hell, there is plenty of historical discrimination for it if one bothers to look into history. If we didnt learn the history of the slave trade would it be ok to be racist?Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00962773214731987941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-485321436646277553.post-70071251152157573892010-10-10T19:52:02.614+01:002010-10-10T19:52:02.614+01:00I think it's ridiculous that the fact that the...I think it's ridiculous that the fact that there has not been a history of abuse means that it isn't as bad. Do we consider that racism towards black people was not really that bad when it all started because there had not been a history of it? The same for the abuse of jews, was that all good until it had been going for a few more years?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-485321436646277553.post-14939292731161965422010-07-26T21:04:26.664+01:002010-07-26T21:04:26.664+01:00It's unfortunate that anyone would be so dim-w...It's unfortunate that anyone would be so dim-witted as to consider racism to be something based on past circumstances, rather than present ones; psychologists have volumes drawn up on such addictions to the past, and inability to live in the present.<br />If a person is faulted on their color today, THAT'S RACISM. It's not a question of how severe it was in comparison; if a person breaks a window, a policeman doesn't ignore the matter because someone else blew up a building 100 years ago, and say "it's not as bad; it's not like anyone blew up the building."<br />However this is the logic that the hypocrites are lambasting us with, when it's an issue of PRINCIPLE regarding discrimination on the basis of color.<br />Simply put, we're told that it's absolutely wrong to say a WORD about if someone's black, Jewish, etc, but if someone has (red hair or associated skin-color) then it's perfectly acceptable to engage in vicious hate-speech and defamation on that basis alone.<br /><br />Clearly this is a complete double-standard of hypocrisy, which concludes an arbitrary political barrier based on popularity and protection of a certain group, while grasping at straws to rationalize it, saying "it's not as bad because blacks had blah-blah-blah" as if rights come from having so many "victimization-points" in your "account."<br /><br />Sorry, doesn't work that way-- rights come from fundamental equality, and so everyone has the same right to equal respect TODAY, not 400 years ago.<br /><br />And any red-haired person who defends defamation of people of his own color, is an "Uncle Tom."IMR2D2https://www.blogger.com/profile/09434896673441895171noreply@blogger.com