He does have the most lovely eyelashes, doesn't he? Credit Rwendland CC-BY-SA-4.0

That there are forms of behaviour that we’ really like to expend substantial effort in rooting out of society seems obvious enough. None of us are in favour of chattel slavery these days, the grooming of children for sex is – near – universally condemned and so on. There is a slight problem though in the inflation of what is the sort of behaviour we’re willing to expend that substantial effort upon. Some mouthie on a bus shouting that you’re a gobshite is unnerving, unwanted and possibly even hateful behaviour but it’s not something that requires anything more than a shrug of the shoulders and a waved middle finger.

There are those middle cases too, should the trans laughed at on a night bus have the entirety of society leaping to their physical defence? If the attack is physical then yes, obviously, but speech? Is every example of casual classism – you bastard toff you – something that government should intervene to prevent?

Or is there some level of whatever that is just normality knocking at that societal door?

Greater Manchester: 65% of people victims of ‘hateful behaviour’

Well, if the majority of people are victims of it then shouldn’t we be saying that this is part of normality?

Two-thirds of Greater Manchester residents have experienced hateful behaviour on the grounds of characteristics such as race, religion and gender, according to a report commissioned in the aftermath of the Manchester Arena bomb.

The report, commissioned by the region’s mayor, Andy Burnham, after the attack last year, asked an independent group of experts to consider how to tackle hateful extremism, social exclusion and radicalisation across Greater Manchester.

And if it’s normality then how much of it needs to be tackled?

Do note again what is being said here. There are undoubtedly behaviours that should be rooted out. The question is though, how wide is that definition going to be? By the time we get to things that 65% of us put up with as a routine matter aren’t we getting close to electing another people who will be worthy of our governors? Or is the complaint that we’ve already done that?

Subscribe to The CT Mailer!

3
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
3 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
3 Comment authors
John GaltBniCSpike Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Spike
Member

Additional question: Should members of specific groups be protected from behavior that seems to be normal (the disapproval of others) and which they themselves express? To what extent should regulators accept the assertion that mistreatment of a member of a class was a commentary on his membership in that class?

These questions assume the research was legitimate. However, as always, mayors do not commission studies; they fund sales pitches. And wink at exaggeration.

BniC
Member
BniC

Are the victims of the arena bombing, or even everyone who attended/worked there and so on, counted as being among those that experienced hateful behaviour.
Also did it ask who the perpetrators of this behaviour were

John Galt
Member

I’m confused. If 65% of people are “victims”, then doesn’t that mean that at least 15% of those “victims” are also perpetrators in other incidents?

“Hans? Are we the baddies?”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU