Banjo <"Did you hear of anyone being properly punished for the rioptous behaviour at the soccer or tennis?"
Yes of course I have, although that lot were mainly white English soccer fans I believe?
Shall we ban all white British people from emigrating here then?

"Not one person has ever been charged with an offence relating to FGM, even though evidence is available from emergency departments of hospitals and some hospitals have specialist units to deal with post FGM problems."

Really? Have you got stats on that Banjo? I have worked in hospital emergency departments where the police have been alerted to those cases... and I would imagine it is the same at all hospitals.
Many laws are broken by many different people of all cultures in this country. No surprises there...

Banjo
Immigrants are required to adhere to the law as any other person. There are laws against stealing but people will still do it, and those who break the law are prosecuted. It is up to the judicial system to implement the full force of the law in these cases.

I agree that the message has not always been strong enough and there are little in the way of arrests that I could find. That is the fault of the justice system and governments who turn a blind eye in some cases under a misguided sense of cultural sensitivities. This stance only fosters the system of illegal FGM but it seems, as Suze's experience demonstrates, police are called to these cases.

It is true that FGM still goes on and some of it in unhygienic backyard operations. There is certainly more to be done on education around FGM (a procedure that has no religious basis) and practioners and parents should be prosecuted with the full force of the law including involvement of DOCS.

FGM is illegal:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/act/consol_act/ca190082/ (scroll down the page a bit)

to all the PC bozos, I really don't care what you think in your brainwashed little minds.
Pericles, I'm neither proud or not, I'm only stating the facts.
Belly, I didn't really understand your response as it was written in your characteristic 'Yoda like grammar'.
Suzeonline, maybe my comments speak volumes about me but at least I am consistent. On the other hand, you wrote ' We can't 'ban' whole cultures or countries because we don't like the practices of a few'
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4230#106606
yet, on another thread, you are all for banning public handgun ownership because of the recent shooting in the USA.
Poirot, you can play with your moustache.

To end this post, have a look at
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/train-passengers-watched-sexual-assault-of-teenage-train-passenger/story-e6frea83-1225990333085?referrer=email&source=AN_email_nl&emcmp=AD&emchn=Newsletter&emlist=Member
and tell me that the dross are welcome and assimilating.

AP:

Being consistent is not necessarily something to be proud of. It all depends in what you're being consistant. A classic study by Theodore Adorno and his associates tried to find out whether some people have personality patterns that make them more prone to prejudice than others. The study concluded that some people have a psychological make up that Adorno referred to as the "authoritarian personality" - with a distinctive set of traits, including - conformity, intolerance, and insecurity.
Those who have this personality pattern, it was found, are submissive to superiors and bullying to inferiors. They tend to have anti-intellectual and anti-scientific attitudes; they are disturbed by ambiguity in sexual or religious matters, and they see the world in very rigid and stereotyped terms. The authoritarian personality, Adorno claimed, is primarily a product of family environment in which the parents were cold, aloof, disciplinarian, and themselves bigoted.
Of course Adorno's work has its flaws, however it is generally accepted that some people are psychologically more prone to prejudiced thinking than others. Therefore, while we all like to think of ourselves as tolerant persons, even passionate in our belief that we all are equal, it is apparent that we all have a continuing obligation to work on our attitudes. Our aim should always be to behave with respect towards others, and to encourage this in all people. That's not "political correctness," but human decency. The key feature of prejudice is that it is always rooted in generalisations and so ignores the differences among individuals.

Thanks, Lexi, it's very timely that you bring up what Adorno wrote about. I'm very intrigued by some basic questions:

* can Adorno's 'authoritarian personality' be related in any way to any particular body of religious dogma ? Or to all of them ? To some far more than others ?

* can it be related to any body of cultural practices, i.e. 'culture' ? Are some 'cultures' more authoritarian than others ? Is the resort to 'culture' in fact an authoritarian tactic ?

Culture and religion are human creations, closely associated with power in social relations. So it would not be a surprise if they dovetailed with power and inequality in societies.

Joe

Hi Joe:

We know, I think, that racism is found among different peoples in societies all over the world, and that it is notable for its international scale and systematic theoretical justification by theologians and scientists alike. To explore the nature of prejudice, Adorno tested his subjects on three different sets of attitudes:
anti-semitism, fascism, and ethnocentrism. His method was to ask the subjects to indicate their agreement or disagreement with a series of statements that were anti-Jewish, authoritarian, or hostile to different or unfamiliar ways of life. Adorno's significant finding was that people who agreed strongly with any one set of statements tended also to agree strongly with the others. In other words those who were prejudiced against Jews were also likely to favour strong authoritarian leadership, and to have a very ethnocentric view of their own group and customs.

Some critics have pointed out that Adorno's methodology was weak in certain respects - that he neglected the possibility of an authoritarian personality amongst radicals as well as conservatives;
others felt that Adorno's concept was too vague and sweeping in its scope. However, as I wrote in my earlier post it is now generally accepted that some people are psychologically more prone to prejudiced thinking than others.