Two articles today, one in the Guardian, the other in the Telegraph, speak volumes of the questionable Great Britain of 2008.
One cannot expect a grain of objective coverage of Conservative Boris Johnson's campaign from the Guardian, granted. But will it ever rise above it's sly, smug cynicism? Mr Johnson, with David Cameron alongside, were speaking in Edmonton, North London, the scene of four recent gang-related murders, on the pressing need to combat such reprehensible violence. But what do the Guardian do? They focus almost entirely on Messrs Johnson and Cameron's membership of the infamous Bullingdon club while studying at Oxford, and equate this with gang membership. The equation of murder and banter I find both an utter disgrace, and utterly unsurprising from the odious Guardian.
In other news, a Muslim Hairdresser is filing for £34,000 to compensate for "...lost earnings and injured feelings". Her complaint will be heard in front of one our many state-resources-parasitic employment tribunals, a Labour government phenomenon. Why? She sees no reason -in a hairdressers!- to show off her locks, demanding to wear the veil. This is quite aside from the fact that she has been previously, "...rejected by about 20 other salons"! What gives the state the right to even dream of telling a hairdresser how to run their business? Why will this case even be heard, wasting valuable resources which could be spent on combatting racism proper? Surely the owner wants her hairdressers to show off their hair, then that is her prerogative, and anyhow, is it not quite a reasonable request?! Pass the sick-bag. Oh, and elect a Conservative government next time to avoid such farcical times.
About Me
- Steve Wall
- I oscillate between being a student in the London School of Economics (LSE), supporting the Conservative Party and contemplating a political-correctness-induced-suicide-attempt.
3 comments:
Business and corporate law exist for exactly these sorts of situations. Surely law isn't a farcical institution...
If a hairdresser should show her hair in a salon, shouldn't a sales assistant at La Senza walk around the store in her sexy underwear?
FYI a veil covers the face. I'm assuming this case refers to the headscarf. If a covered woman cannot work in a salon because people want to see her hair, what are her options? She clearly wants to be a hairstylist. If she opens a women's only salon, her business may be branded as sexually discriminatory. So basically she's left with no options.
Boris Johnson is stuck in the past. People like him need to face the reality of non-white, non-Christian/Catholic/Protestant immigrants, who really aren't so threatening if you let them be. I do agree that gang-related violence needs to be addressed at the roots though. London boys are not growing up in an ideal situation, and some of this may have to do with overcrowding and ethnic issues unfortunately.
S,
Thanks for your comments, I appreciate them, particularly as they are my first!
You make some good points, and I apologize for my ignorance on certian points. On the La Senza point, while I love your suggestion, there's a public decency element there obviously, but I see what you're getting at.
Look, I despise any instances where someone is solely discriminated against for reasons completely beyond their control (i.e. skin colour). But this is different; this is a self-run business; her rule should be her's freely to make rule, particularly when it is so central to the profession in question.
I think the real answer to racism lies in the hands of teachers, and more broadly our education system, which should, through passionate teaching and a comprehensive curriculum combat ill-informed prejudice at source.
And finally, if I may, let me refute your comments about Mr Johnson, who I admire greatly. The papers will point to quotes which paint him as a racist; he is not; be careful to judge a man by his action, not his off-the-cuff words.
His honest is beguiling; his integrity is suprising in his profession; his antidote to political-correctness is utterly refreshing; he is, truly, a Renaissance man. Please consider him for your vote.
Being at a loss for time to post responses to everything on here, I'm going to restrict myself to one small factual-based point. Re your 'public decency' comment below: to many Muslim women, being in public without a headscarf IS a matter of public decency, and is as anathema as it would be to other women (or men) to be told they must work without trousers on.
P.S., am thinking of setting up a counter-blog, from which to espouse my pro-nothing Guardian red-mist filth.
Post a Comment