Heduana & Belly,

I think there are some people who do not accurately understand the meaning of racism - or indeed sexism or ageism. These concepts are based on the premise of discriminating against others because of race, gender, age: of course everyone understands that. But I think it is the very word "discriminating" that some people interpret incorrectly. It doesn't mean to treat badly. Or to put down. It has no negative connotations whatsoever. In fact the discriminating buyer is often appealed to advertisments for high end of the market buys.

It simply means to treat differently. Thus, the term "reverse-racism" is not just a total nonsense but a furtherance of discrimination.

Of course you are completely correct. We love our parents/lovers etc. warts and all. We are expected to accept people in the main, warts and all. Kid gloves, special treatment etc. is as much part and parcel of discrimination as throwing stones and name-calling.
However, there seem to be many people who find this concept difficult - if not impossible - to understand.

'However, there seem to be many people who find this concept difficult - if not impossible - to understand.'

Indeed there are, Romany - sadly.

Heduanna, your post is typical of the uninformed, unintelligent and harmful nonsense that fills the talk-show airwaves and 'discussion' forums such as this.

Rolf Harris is an anachronistic throw-back to white colonialisim who gained his profile from the support of ignorant Brits who, like yourself, knew and know, no better. Their, and your ignorance or harmless intentions do not lessent the absurdity and harmfulness of their attitudes.

I can only hope that you learn something from those occasional contributors whose voices of reason and intelligence attempt to highlight the errors in your thinking - thought it's painful to see their pain-staking attempts to explain what should be obvious. I admit that they are more patient and measured than I - I've long since lost all patience with such insipient stupidity as you seem to admire.

mikisdad

You seem to have used many words to say nothing.

You might need to reread my posts in order to fully understand the point I am making. For your benefit I will repeat it here: My point is this: When we treat other human beings as equals we treat them with respect.

What is your point?

mikisdad wrote: "I can only hope that you learn something from those occasional contributors whose voices of reason and intelligence attempt to highlight the errors in your thinking" - Heduanna, clearly you haven't.

I have no desire to be accused of flaming but, just in case you still haven't got the point, I'll just say than this -

Throughout this discussion, from its original prejudiced and ill-considered start to your last response, you have ridden over any attempt at reason with your pompous and supercilious responses. None-the-less, you and those like you need to realise that there are those who see through your nasty attitudes and insidious prejudice and we will not let you get away with it.

Clear enough for you?

yorkshire_pudding

Your post, apart from irrational insinuation, is just as obscure as mikidads. You seem to be responding to something I have not said.

Do you really think it is appropriate to respond with such venom without saying why?

I am very saddened to be called 'pompous and supercilious' but I assume you have your own reasons for perceiving my remarks in that way.

What do you mean by prejudiced?

Perhaps you are referring to my comments about 'do-gooders'? If so please allow me to make it clear here I am NOT using the term'do gooder' as a derogatory label and I am NOT referring to all those who seek to do good. I am a do-gooder myself, after all. I am referring only to those who, in their zeal, are unable to see the long term effects of excessive sympathy and charity so that while they think they are doing good the reverse is the result.

We can see an example of the devastating results of misplaced good deeds in Cape York where Noel Pearson and others are fighting to have the situation reversed. He talks about 'a view of Aboriginal people as hopeless, marginalised victims' and 'we were placed in a position of complete dependency through the social security system' and calls it a 'completely poisonous situation'. You can read one of his interviews at: http://www.abc.net.au/austory/transcripts/s723570.htm

I have first hand knowledge of the sort of thing he is referring to through my own experience growing up and through my relatives with Aboriginal heritage.