Tag Archives: discrimination

The Case of the Missing Pigment

earls, albino rhino, beer, human rights, bigotry,

Earls isn't ritually murdering albinos but some albinos don't see a difference. From: Missauga.com

A recent human rights complaint has surfaced in BC, in regards to Earls Restaurant and the serving of their Albino Rhino brand ale. They’ve been making and serving the beer for 25 years but a woman, Ikponwosa (I.K.) Ero, has now filed a human rights complaint that the beer discriminates against albinos. There is a clip to watch as well as the news report.

There is a difference between being an albino and being albinoid, where one is missing some of the pigmentation. While Ms Ero looks albinoid, her boss looks to be albino. Albinism does in fact have some serious defects for the person afflicted including vision and blood problems, and cancer risks. However, albinism affects almost every species. Many Native Americans/First Nations hold the white buffalo sacred. There are albino rabbits, alligators, fish, tigers and people. So maybe Earls holds their beer sacred.

human rights, albino, albino rhino, albinism, earls restaurant

This baby albino rhino is from Rocketworld. Is it derogatory to people suffering from albinism?

While I imagine Earls named their beer for its paleness, Ms Ero’s boss, Peter Ash says, “Follow your logic. If they have Alzheimer’s appetizers on the billboard, you’re totally okay with bringing your grandmother there to chow down a plate of Alzheimer’s appetizers.” Well, unfortunately my logic runs a different path from his. If my grandmother had Alzheimer’s she probably wouldn’t care or remember what the appetizers were called. Reminds me of the diner in the US (Heart Attack Grill) that sells Flatliner Fries and Triple Bypass burgers. They’re maybe being honest or are they demeaning people who have had heart attacks?

Second, my logic says, yeah an albino rhino is a white rhino. It does not say to me that it has anything to do with a person, not is it derogatory in any way. Since albinism affects most species, how is naming this beer the same as being mean to albino people?

While people suffering from albinism have health challenges and might have been picked on by some insensitive people, overall I don’t see most people ostracizing them because of a beer brand. That may not be true in all cultures and albino children have been murdered in Africa for magical rituals. I fully understand being singled out for being different. I had a fair share of it in my childhood but I don’t presume that Albino Rhino beer is about albinoid people, nor that Fat Bastard wine is out to be nasty to anyone overweight.

Sometimes it’s good to be politically correct, and sometimes people become hyper-sensitized, seeing evil and wrong every where. I’d say take such brands with a grain of salt, but may I should say a grain of pepper.

 

5 Comments

Filed under Culture, news, people

Another Stupid Way to Objectify Women

lingerie football, sexism, discrimination, chauvinism, objectification, women's sports

Women are still the butt of society’s joke. Creative Commons: John Pozadzides flickr

The news recently reported that Vancouver would be subjected to a new sport. Well, not really a new sport but played a new way. Lingerie Football. I do not kid you. It seems that the only way for women to actually get to play the sport is take off their clothes. The organizer, a man, was most serious about how these women had sports skills (they could run, they could throw) but really, if you have half-disrobed them what exactly are you hoping people will watch?

Is this the only way that people will watch women’s sports, if they’re objectified and showing titillating bits of flesh? One friend said, “Well, they have a choice in joining, don’t they?” He couldn’t see anything wrong in this. Let’s look at a few problems: if you happen to be the best runner or catcher ever but you’re a stocky woman, or not particularly beautiful, or missing the right curves for wearing skimpy underwear on the field, do you think you’ll be picked to play football? Is there even a woman’s team anywhere where they get to wear the protective football uniform? What else is wrong? Oh yeah, let’s go look at the sex kittens. Who cares if they can run or throw a ball; we’re not going to take them seriously anyway.

Sure, a woman can choose to join or not but it’s not putting this on par with men’s football, nor will it be considered a serious game. To think this is the only way women can play football galls me. Sure, women will volunteer for this. Many of us will do a lot for money. Sure, they’re not being forced, but a woman might wear a burka but not be forced to because it’s been drummed into her head that she should cover up (or be uncovered) while men can do as they please. It doesn’t make it right. I do not agree with any group that decides men and women should be allowed different rights. If this is the way football is going to be, then make the men run around in jock straps and runners only.

lingerie football, sexism, discrimination, chauvinism, objectification, women's sports

Men’s football gets shoulder pads, but women’s gets cleavage as well. Housey Lei, Design You Trust

Oh and let’s talk about the ludicrous, sexist costumes. They’re wearing uniform bikinis, I suppose,with runners, shoulder and knee padsand helmets. And then to make the utmost of stupidity and objectification there are adjustable garters (the straps for holding up stockings) and a garter around the leg. The men who organized this should be ashamed but they’re too idiotic to understand that this continues to put women in a category where even the police have said, don’t dress provocatively or you’ll get raped. The last is based on a real example in Canada and was yet another example of how the blame is placed with the woman.

The organizers are businessmen of course, exploiters of people, and they see it as a great money-making venture, as pimps always do. Now do not get me wrong, women and men should be able to dress up or down or sexy as they please. But it shouldn’t be a requirement for a place to work, as it often is. (Do the women at one of your restaurants/bars have to wear tight/short/skimpy/low-cut clothes as part of their “uniform?”)  Are there any men working the same job? This is just yet another case of where society considers women nothing but sexual victims (whether for rape or exploitation or coveted possessions). It’s not right and it certainly isn’t harmless. Any other job and it would be grounds for sexual discrimination or harassment. Consider that.

This makes me very angry and I would hope people would boycott it but I’ve found the masses to be self-centered, unthinking and as stupid as the organizers. Next up, watch for burka baseball or some other version of women sexually exploited for your viewing pleasure.

9 Comments

Filed under Culture, sex, sports

What Egalitarian Means

They called it Women’s Lib or Feminism. They called it Black Power. They called it Gay Pride. They  called it the Suffragette Movement. It has had many names but what it all boils down to is equal rights. Yes, equal rights, that every person, regardless of race, gender, sexual preference or religion should have equal rights.

I realized a while back that I’m not really a feminist, and it’s too bad some people color that as a negative thing (misconstruing it with feminazis who are adamant, woman over the expense of others hard noses). I am an egalitarian. Whether I am that color, that race, that gender, it matters not. Everyone should have a fair chance.

Obviously, I was raised in a culture that alows women certain rights, that also has laws about human rights. In my lifetime those rights have changed, allowing in most places across Canada gay marriage, recognizing discrimination. It’s not perfect and there are still obvious cases of discrimination, racial profiling, bigotry and hate crimes. Otherwise we wouldn’t hear about these in the news.

I think everyone needs to be given a fair shake. Unfortunately, everyone is born into different circumstances. They may be in a country that lacks human rights, that treats women as chattel, that considers a race inferior, that has poverty, corruption and disease. They might be born into a family with too many kids and not enough money to feed them, into royalty, with physical or mental defects, into a loving family, a hateful neighborhood, a low populated farming population. They could be affected by war, drought, flooding, car accidents, rape, murder, economic collapse, disease, love, hate, generosity, prejudice, fear, etc. There are thousands of ways that each person begins a life without being on even footing with everyone else.

This does not mean that we should just accept this status quo, that it’s your lot in life and you should therefore accept it and not strive above your station. If that were the case, women would still not have the vote, black people would still be slaves in the US, Japanese would still be in interment camps in BC, royalty would still be ruling… Oh, right, we still have that. I am inherently against monarchies whether figureheads or leaders, because they did not attain their position through popular vote. They get to be “royal” and rich because they inherit the position. Sure, we the people might vote in a scoundrel (Bush comes to mind) but it is the bed we make ourselves (mostly, but not all in Bush’s case), not the bed we are shoved into.

Inheriting the family business is one thing but not if it’s nominative ruler of a country. In an election everyone  who runs should have a fair shake at winning. That’s being egalitarian. Of course we have examples of sham elections, fudged ballots such in Iran and with Mugabe’s tyranny in Zimbabwe or Bush’s suspect election in the US. When something becomes unfair as the rigged elections of these rulers, it really bothers me. It’s not fair, the rules for everyone having a “fair chance” are tossed out.

When it comes to subjugation of women and children, and in some places men as well, I cannot understand how someone could treat a person as inferior because they are of a different sex. We’re all human beings. We must work together to survive and because one sex bears the fruit of the race does not make them inferior. To keep someone subjugated means that they aren’t allowed to do things or make their own decisions, that they are possessions of another. There have slaves of various races and there are slaves of gender. No matter how you cut it, it is still slavery, one human owning another.

There are people that believe in religious freedom but only if it applies to them. They then think that “those people over there” need to be converted or are Satan’s minions or the infidel. They shouldn’t do it that way. To convert someone by sword or gun serves only to give lip service to a religion not build true faith. It would definitely backfire with me, for no matter what I said to preserve my life I would grow to hate and detest the “faith” that was trying to convert me. In essence, should a person’s faith require them to wear an icon, a seven-pointed hat, a tattooed forehead or robes with pink polka dots, it is up to them. They shouldn’t, no matter what they claim, have a faith that requires them to subjugate, beat, murder, rob or otherwise denigrate another human being. What has been done in the name of religion is inexcusable. Basic human rights is what it comes down to.

So yes, I’m an egalitarian to the bone. It is such a fundamental part of my being that it could never be removed. Am I perfect in my philosophy, free of judgment and prejudice in all things. No. Cultural and societal conditioning, moires and values can sway and color us. I too have to watch for attitudes sneaking in which could prejudice me against someone. Difference is sometimes a hard thing for people to accept.

A person should get the fairest chance at life. That means through skill and experience should someone get the job, not through age, or gender, or looks, or color or religion. It should be on what the best person can do. If that goes to a white guy fine. If it seems there are too many white guys and not enough women or people of color then don’t rig requirements for a job or admission into something by that criteria because it is reverse discrimination. Instead, make is possible for those people to attain better educations if they have come from limited circumstances, no matter who they are.

I know there are many connotations to fairness and that ethical equations come into play, sometimes protect a culture or a way of life. But to me the basic rule applies, do what you will, as long as it hurts no one else. And everyone should get a fair chance at life and all its aspects and not be limited due to how we were born.  Overall, I don’t think it’s a bad way to live my life, trying to consider the rights of others and working to make sure they get a fair shake.

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture, history, life, people, politics, religion, security, sex

Gay Specifics: Why There are Bathhouses and Gay Bars

Someone recently responded to my post on Pope Benedict and part of the comment was: Why should we care if a bunch of gays protest the Pope. This not just a religous thing. It’s about a people who want to legitmize and mainstream their perversions. Gay bars and hotels are in a true sense houses of discrimination. What if some restaurant throws out a gay..? (Sic)

Whoa! Perversions? Not just a religious thing? Well let’s see. You’re right, being gay is not just a religious thing. Gays protesting the pope, well that seems religious but I’m sure that some of those gays protesting (beside all us straight people) are also not religious. The protest is on principle, on the basis of discrimination and perpetuating hate crimes.

Hate? You say you don’t hate these people; they’re just perverts. Hmm. Perverts. I guess because it’s not in the Bible or something. But a gay bar makes a house of discrimination more than say, a men’s club where they can discriminate against women and paw and fondle single women (as waitresses) while these guys’ wives stay at home with the little chumps. I wonder if that’s in the Bible. Or let’s see, a house of discrimination, like those golf clubs that only allow a person in if they can afford the exorbitant fees, make them elitist and discriminating against the poor. Hmmm.

Well gosh, those darn gays are perverse whereas playing golf or say, people having extramarital affairs is normal. Why? Because some book written just a few cultures ago (like almost two thousand years ago–and no it wasn’t written right at the birth of Christ) says go forth and multiply and a man who lays with a man goes against reproduction, or some such. Sounds kind of like everyones’ homophobia and fear of homosexuality spreading like a disease is kind of religious in that sense.

Someone told us it was wrong, that it offended, that it went not just against someone’s personal dislikes but went against THE WILL OF GOD. Therefore it is wrong. And God pulls more weight. Right?

And guess what? People took that God’s word thing pretty seriously for a long time, using it to persecute, kill and jail homosexuals. Since it’s not a disease and some people are born preferring the same gender for partners, what was a homosexual to do? Stand around and wait for something horrible to happen to them because people got incensed at what they did behind closed doors? If we all got involved in each other’s personal lives, whose life could stand up to the scrutiny. Excuse me, sir, you’ve been using the missionary position for twenty-five years and haven’t given your wife an orgasm in twenty. Sorry, ma’am, but laying there like a dead fish isn’t called making love.

I think you get the picture. No one’s life can be held up to the moral candle constantly. And what people do in their bedrooms is between them, whoever they do it with. So homosexuals, wishing to avoid the pogroms of the era, formed bathhouses, where men could meet and take care of their needs. They created gay bars, where they would be able to meet others without being accused of hitting on straight men (and consequently being gay bashed). It was in fact, straight people who caused the formation of gay bars. And all the gay bars in New York in the 50s and 60s were owned by straight people or the Mafia.

The Stonewall riots of 1969 happened because of persistent persecution by the police and just one too many injustices. The 60s were a turning point that spawned many movements including the black rights and gay rights movements as well as anti-war protests. Reading about Stonewall will show exactly why some of these bars were created to begin with. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots

Perversions? In whose book? The Bible. So yeah, moral sensibility is often tied so deeply in a person’s roots that they don’t realize those morals may be based on some religious teaching. And remember, if you don’t like those other religions because they’re persecuting and subjugating, then make sure to check your religious yard first. Are you persecuting or making a group “other” because they’re female or black or gay? In one sense, yes, everyone should be equal and treated so, but until that is completely accepted in our society there are still going to be gay bars because homosexuals need a place to feel safe.

Oh and for every paranoid right winger out there who is afraid that homosexuality was a disease, you can rest easy. It’s not and many homosexuals do have children, fulfilling that reproduction thing that the Bible loves so much. And guess what? Those who have genetic children (as opposed to adopting) don’t necessarily have gay children. And even the adopted ones grow up straight. Kinda throws water on the fire of the gay disease theory.

1 Comment

Filed under crime, Culture, history, life, news, people, religion, sex