The State of Bigotry in JKR's Homeland // Of curls and culture

[Petra Pan]

Lynn, in part:
> From what we understand, the schools
> in the area are either not equipped
> or not willing to deal with bi-lingual
> children.  Part of the problem is
> that many of the kids are only there
> for a short time, usually 3 years, and
> perhaps the schools just don't have
> the resources to deal with the
> constant stream or just don't want to. 
> However, what the schools have said is
> that the tests end up being lower
> since one year just isn't enough time
> to bring the kids up to the language
> and academic standards and then the
> test results are lower, which hurts
> the school standings.  How in the
> world this applies to a four year old
> I have yet to figure out.  They have
> national tests for four year olds? 
> However, perhaps they feel they need
> to follow the policy without exception. 
> Again, though, without finding out just
> where a student falls linguistically
> and academically seems strange to me.

To me also.

still Lynn:
> On the other hand, there could be kids
> from as many as 15 different countries
> who are needing to start school, all
> with a different language and different
> academic standards.  Perhaps by
> refusing them all they are trying to
> avoid being accused of discrimination
> by saying the academic standards of
> this country are okay but that one is
> lacking.

Ah but if the concern is an academic one, 
then why aren't applicants being assessed 
academically INDIVIDUALLY?

Really, it's one thing to turn away 
pupils that they are not capable of 
educating but it's quite another for the 
schools to enact a policy that is based 
on the erroneous assumptions that 

(a) they cannot teach anyone who is 
bilingual,

(b) that everyone who's bilingual (read: 
speaks English as a 2nd language) is 
academically inferior, and 

(c) the above are and will always be true, 
without exception.

So are those schools prone to poor logic, 
which is particularly egregious for 
institutions of learning, in the formation 
of their policies or are they hiding 
motives they are unwilling to express in 
their rejections? (This ever-so-suspicious 
mind wants to know...<g>)

Y'know, it's a good thing your daughter 
will not be spending her impressionable 
years soaking up poor logic.

     *     *     *

Marley:
> The scottish thing is important -
> I'll bet you 20 that if an Asian 
> Scottish football fan was set
> upon by English football fans the 
> scots would all rush to defend him.
> I also heard that many of the 
> minorities in Scotland think of
> themselves as Scottish first, yet 
> the same is not true of minorities
> in England. Maybe it's something to
> do with strong cultural identity.

Interesting point - cultural identity 
used to be synonymous with racial 
identity, and thus defined by physical 
traits as opposed to actually cultural 
ones.  Conventional wisdom holds the 
following rule of thumb to be true: If 
someone looks and sounds like you, you 
two probably share a common culture.  
But in the more complicated world 
today, how would your above scenario 
work?  We're talking about a situation 
that doesn't exactly foster in-depth 
exchanges of info on cultural 
backgrounds.

In other words, how would the 
rescuing Scots know that a fellow 
Scottish football fan is being 
attacked if the attacked is Asian in 
appearance?  I'm assuming that your 
example is implying that the rescue 
is prompted by the desire to defend 
a fellow SCOTTish football fan from 
the supporters of the rival English 
team, and not because of anything 
else.  Heck, in the midst of the 
melee, how would the Scots and the 
Anglos know who's friend and who's 
foe?

Is 'Gaelic-dar' a less well known 
cousin of the gay-dar?  <eg>

     *     *     *

Yours truly:
> Y'know, on the one hand, public 
> displays of prejudice appall me.  
> But OTOH, driving the bigots 
> underground only hides such 
> tendencies, which is surely more 
> insidious.
>
> The question of how a society can 
> nudge bigots into shedding 
> prejudices without triggering the 
> defense mechanism and the digging 
> in of heels has no easy answers

Tabouli, in part:
> I'd rather reform people than gag
> them.  Not an easy task, as you
> say, but not triggering the defence
> mechanism is, in my experience,
> absolutely *CRUCIAL*.
> 
> The problem with a lot of campaigning
> against prejudice is not the
> message, or the intention.  Both are
> (usually) great.  The problem is
> with the *marketing*.  I've seen so
> many depressing "cultural diversity"
> sessions where the presenter gets up
> and starts a sermon telling people
> that they are Prejudiced Without
> Knowing It by virtue of being
> members of the majority culture,
> and illustrates this point with ten
> case studies of hidden prejudice
> caused by people like them which
> caused terrible suffering, and then
> hits them with a long list of
> ambiguous rules and terms which
> must be followed to the letter lest
> the wrath of the Discrimination Act
> fall upon their heads.

Couldn't have said it better myself!

But I do want to add that such efforts 
are counter-productive because they 
tend to define prejudice with hard-
and-fast rules for identifying 'markers' 
of prejudice.  Rules are easy and 
do-able while insightful analysis is 
hard to teach.  Yet, what's the point of 
rules when they inevitably apply only to 
a specific set of circumstances?  This 
is temporal.  We would be better off 
with skills that can be applied with 
more universality.

I much prefer people who know 
their own prejudices, their own foibles 
that they do not act upon than people who 
cling to the belief that since they do 
not have a prejudiced bone in their body, 
they never have to be on the look out for 
poor judgments of others on their own part.

The typical efforts in combating prejudice 
inevitably encourage bigots to take the 
latter approach.

Tabouli, in another part:
> Start by attacking them and their
> culture and the behaviour they consider
> reasonable and normal, attempt to
> blackmail them with emotional appeals
> and then threaten them with litigation
> if they fail to follow rules they
> consider confusing and intrusive and
> pointless... honestly!  If anything,
> this will *increase* their prejudice!

Oh yes, this happens all the time in RL!

I must confess that I can't wait to see 
how JKR ultimately develops the themes 
of prejudice in HP; just what does she 
have in store for the Death Eaters and 
those of their ilk?

Tabouli:
<snip ex. of growth and paradigm shift> 
> OK, so perhaps not a great triumph
> over prejudice, but a nudge, I feel.

Selling yourself short here.  :)

Y'know, in helping your student to adopt 
a different POV, you have improved her 
life.  I mean really, who wants to feel 
insulted, right?  Perhaps this is the 
'spoonful of sugar' that would help make 
our current experiments with cultural 
diversity less of a chore and more of 
A Great Adventure.

Ultimately, and practically speaking, 
the shedding of bigotry can only be 
motivated by possible improvement of the 
bigots' experience of being alive.  
Improvement of 'their lot at the expense 
of mine' surely motivates nary a human 
who'd insist on the greatest of divides 
between 'me, myself & mine' and 'the 
other'/'them.'

Petra chants: "31 days - just 31!"
a
n  :)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com